On Friday, November 24, 2023 at 5:53:45 PM UTC-8, mitchr...@gmail.com wrote:
> On Wednesday, November 22, 2023 at 9:21:08 PM UTC-8, patdolan wrote:
> > On Wednesday, November 22, 2023 at 8:35:08 PM UTC-8, mitchr...@gmail.com wrote:
> > > On Wednesday, November 22, 2023 at 6:39:34 PM UTC-8, patdolan wrote:
> > > > On Wednesday, November 22, 2023 at 5:29:42 PM UTC-8, mitchr....@gmail.com wrote:
> > > > > In astronomy if gravity slows down rotation
> > > > > where is the evidence?
> > > > > The age of the universe would show most
> > > > > objects should have already.
> > > > > But they all have significant rotations.
> > > > >
> > > > > Mitchell Raemsch
> > > > Mitch, my man, somewhere I read that Mach's principle is the reason for inertia. One conclusion that can be drawn from Mach's principle is the concept of "rotational entropy" which can be understood as the requirement that 1) all local rotational motion is decreasing, and 2) mediated by Mach's principle, all local rotational motion is imparted to the total rotational motion of the entire universe. This transfer continues until such time as what may be considered the final rotational state of the universe, or "rotational heat death" pertains everywhere in the universe. So "rotation" as a definable state of motion, is no longer detectable.
> > > That would predict rotational chaos.
> > > And it does not exist.
> > > The universe as a whole does not have a center of which to rotate around.
> > > If mach predicted rotation to go away why hasn't it?
> > > That form of motion is not going away....
> > > >
> > > > The precession of the gyroscope is a piece of a posteriori synthetic knowledge which, while it can be precisely described by mathematical expressions, is an utter mystery as to why it occurs in the first place. The gravity-defying free end of a spinning gyroscope constitutes a perfectly consistent proof of the existence of God.
> Don't we push its rotation?
> The earth is not a gyroscope. Its turning cancels its primary G weight.
> There is more weight at the pole for the same energy/mass than
> at the rotating equator.
> > > A gyroscope gets braced in space by horizontal rotation weight.
> > > If it is tilted its rotation weight goes away.
> > The gyroscopic phenomenon is epi-Newtonian and epi-Hamiltonian. We have no mechanics that fully describe it. There is no equation in mechanics that relates a force vector at the unsupported end of a rotating mass to the gravitational field vector at the unsupported end of a rotating mass. And that is and end to it, Mitch.
> It is the orientation that changes the turning gyroscope weight in gravity.
> A turning wheel on the road will have almost no vertical rotation weight.
Mitch, do you have a toy gyroscope? Get it out then post to me. We will perform a demonstration right here in this in real time.

On Friday, November 24, 2023 at 7:10:42 PM UTC-8, mitchr...@gmail.com wrote:
> On Friday, November 24, 2023 at 6:16:27 PM UTC-8, patdolan wrote:
> > On Friday, November 24, 2023 at 5:53:45 PM UTC-8, mitchr...@gmail.com wrote:
> > > On Wednesday, November 22, 2023 at 9:21:08 PM UTC-8, patdolan wrote:
> > > > On Wednesday, November 22, 2023 at 8:35:08 PM UTC-8, mitchr....@gmail.com wrote:
> > > > > On Wednesday, November 22, 2023 at 6:39:34 PM UTC-8, patdolan wrote:
> > > > > > On Wednesday, November 22, 2023 at 5:29:42 PM UTC-8, mitchr...@gmail.com wrote:
> > > > > > > In astronomy if gravity slows down rotation
> > > > > > > where is the evidence?
> > > > > > > The age of the universe would show most
> > > > > > > objects should have already.
> > > > > > > But they all have significant rotations.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Mitchell Raemsch
> > > > > > Mitch, my man, somewhere I read that Mach's principle is the reason for inertia. One conclusion that can be drawn from Mach's principle is the concept of "rotational entropy" which can be understood as the requirement that 1) all local rotational motion is decreasing, and 2) mediated by Mach's principle, all local rotational motion is imparted to the total rotational motion of the entire universe. This transfer continues until such time as what may be considered the final rotational state of the universe, or "rotational heat death" pertains everywhere in the universe. So "rotation" as a definable state of motion, is no longer detectable.
> > > > > That would predict rotational chaos.
> > > > > And it does not exist.
> > > > > The universe as a whole does not have a center of which to rotate around.
> > > > > If mach predicted rotation to go away why hasn't it?
> > > > > That form of motion is not going away....
> > > > > >
> > > > > > The precession of the gyroscope is a piece of a posteriori synthetic knowledge which, while it can be precisely described by mathematical expressions, is an utter mystery as to why it occurs in the first place. The gravity-defying free end of a spinning gyroscope constitutes a perfectly consistent proof of the existence of God.
> > > Don't we push its rotation?
> > > The earth is not a gyroscope. Its turning cancels its primary G weight.
> > > There is more weight at the pole for the same energy/mass than
> > > at the rotating equator.
> > > > > A gyroscope gets braced in space by horizontal rotation weight.
> > > > > If it is tilted its rotation weight goes away.
> > > > The gyroscopic phenomenon is epi-Newtonian and epi-Hamiltonian. We have no mechanics that fully describe it. There is no equation in mechanics that relates a force vector at the unsupported end of a rotating mass to the gravitational field vector at the unsupported end of a rotating mass. And that is and end to it, Mitch.
> > > It is the orientation that changes the turning gyroscope weight in gravity.
> > > A turning wheel on the road will have almost no vertical rotation weight.
> > Mitch, do you have a toy gyroscope? Get it out then post to me. We will perform a demonstration right here in this in real time.
> No I don't.
> I believe weight brace is going away where you tilt it.
No worries Mitch. I have a wonderful toy gyroscope which I keep on the same shelf as my teddy bears. It weights almost two pounds, is over 6 inches in diameter, is enclosed in a plastic cover, and has a cranking port so I can really whip up the rpms.

I have attached a string to the ceiling. I am now dangling the gyroscope from that string while holding the other end with my fingers. The axis is level and parallel with the floor. It is not spinning. Now I'm letting go with my fingers. The gyroscope rotated down 90 degrees so that it is now dangling from the ceiling with the axis now vertical to the floor--string end is high and the other end I held in my fingers is low. Now I'll bring the axis back up to level with the floor and spin up the gyro real good...

Okay, the gyro is really humming! The string and my fingers are holding the axis level to the floor again. Now I'm going to let go with my fingers.....LOOK AT THAT! The loose end doesn't rotate down this time! Yes, it's precessing. But the precession is far less dramatic and far less interesting than the gravity-defying end of the gyro hanging there in mid air. The axis is absolutely level with the floor and no visible means of support.

This MIT schiester thinks he has solved the riddle https://youtu.be/XPUuF_dECVI?si=OnAfXs6N_jn0LoM3&t=1698

patdolan wrote:
>
> On Friday, November 24, 2023 at 7:10:42 PM UTC-8, mitchr...@gmail.com wrote:
> > On Friday, November 24, 2023 at 6:16:27 PM UTC-8, patdolan wrote:
> > > On Friday, November 24, 2023 at 5:53:45 PM UTC-8, mitchr...@gmail.com wrote:
> > > > On Wednesday, November 22, 2023 at 9:21:08 PM UTC-8, patdolan wrote:
> > > > > On Wednesday, November 22, 2023 at 8:35:08 PM UTC-8, mitchr...@gmail.com wrote:
> > > > > > On Wednesday, November 22, 2023 at 6:39:34 PM UTC-8, patdolan wrote:
> > > > > > > On Wednesday, November 22, 2023 at 5:29:42 PM UTC-8, mitchr...@gmail.com wrote:
> > > > > > > > In astronomy if gravity slows down rotation
> > > > > > > > where is the evidence?
> > > > > > > > The age of the universe would show most
> > > > > > > > objects should have already.
> > > > > > > > But they all have significant rotations.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Mitchell Raemsch
> > > > > > > Mitch, my man, somewhere I read that Mach's principle is the reason for inertia. One conclusion that can be drawn from Mach's principle is the concept of "rotational entropy" which can be understood as the requirement that 1) all local rotational motion is decreasing, and 2) mediated by Mach's principle, all local rotational motion is imparted to the total rotational motion of the entire universe. This transfer continues until such time as what may be considered the final rotational
> > > > > > That would predict rotational chaos.
> > > > > > And it does not exist.
> > > > > > The universe as a whole does not have a center of which to rotate around.
> > > > > > If mach predicted rotation to go away why hasn't it?
> > > > > > That form of motion is not going away....
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > The precession of the gyroscope is a piece of a posteriori synthetic knowledge which, while it can be precisely described by mathematical expressions, is an utter mystery as to why it occurs in the first place. The gravity-defying free end of a spinning gyroscope constitutes a perfectly consistent proof of the existence of God.
> > > > Don't we push its rotation?
> > > > The earth is not a gyroscope. Its turning cancels its primary G weight.
> > > > There is more weight at the pole for the same energy/mass than
> > > > at the rotating equator.
> > > > > > A gyroscope gets braced in space by horizontal rotation weight.
> > > > > > If it is tilted its rotation weight goes away.
> > > > > The gyroscopic phenomenon is epi-Newtonian and epi-Hamiltonian. We have no mechanics that fully describe it. There is no equation in mechanics that relates a force vector at the unsupported end of a rotating mass to the gravitational field vector at the unsupported end of a rotating mass. And that is and end to it, Mitch.
> > > > It is the orientation that changes the turning gyroscope weight in gravity.
> > > > A turning wheel on the road will have almost no vertical rotation weight.
> > > Mitch, do you have a toy gyroscope? Get it out then post to me. We will perform a demonstration right here in this in real time.
> > No I don't.
> > I believe weight brace is going away where you tilt it.
> No worries Mitch. I have a wonderful toy gyroscope which I keep on the same shelf as my teddy bears. It weights almost two pounds, is over 6 inches in diameter, is enclosed in a plastic cover, and has a cranking port so I can really whip up the rpms.
>
> I have attached a string to the ceiling. I am now dangling the gyroscope from that string while holding the other end with my fingers. The axis is level and parallel with the floor. It is not spinning. Now I'm letting go with my fingers. The gyroscope rotated down 90 degrees so that it is now dangling from the ceiling with the axis now vertical to the floor--string end is high and the other end I held in my fingers is low. Now I'll bring the axis back up to level with the floor and spin up
>
> Okay, the gyro is really humming! The string and my fingers are holding the axis level to the floor again. Now I'm going to let go with my fingers....LOOK AT THAT! The loose end doesn't rotate down this time! Yes, it's precessing. But the precession is far less dramatic and far less interesting than the gravity-defying end of the gyro hanging there in mid air. The axis is absolutely level with the floor and no visible means of support.
>
> This MIT schiester thinks he has solved the riddle https://youtu.be/XPUuF_dECVI?si=OnAfXs6N_jn0LoM3&t=1698

if you are dangling the gyroscope from that string while holding the
other end with your fingers... you owe Einstein royaltities fees.

--
The Starmaker -- To question the unquestionable, ask the unaskable,
to think the unthinkable, mention the unmentionable, say the unsayable,
and challenge the unchallengeable.

On Friday, November 24, 2023 at 9:23:27 PM UTC-8, The Starmaker wrote:
> patdolan wrote:
> >
> > On Friday, November 24, 2023 at 7:10:42 PM UTC-8, mitchr...@gmail.com wrote:
> > > On Friday, November 24, 2023 at 6:16:27 PM UTC-8, patdolan wrote:
> > > > On Friday, November 24, 2023 at 5:53:45 PM UTC-8, mitchr...@gmail.com wrote:
> > > > > On Wednesday, November 22, 2023 at 9:21:08 PM UTC-8, patdolan wrote:
> > > > > > On Wednesday, November 22, 2023 at 8:35:08 PM UTC-8, mitchr...@gmail.com wrote:
> > > > > > > On Wednesday, November 22, 2023 at 6:39:34 PM UTC-8, patdolan wrote:
> > > > > > > > On Wednesday, November 22, 2023 at 5:29:42 PM UTC-8, mitchr...@gmail.com wrote:
> > > > > > > > > In astronomy if gravity slows down rotation
> > > > > > > > > where is the evidence?
> > > > > > > > > The age of the universe would show most
> > > > > > > > > objects should have already.
> > > > > > > > > But they all have significant rotations.
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Mitchell Raemsch
> > > > > > > > Mitch, my man, somewhere I read that Mach's principle is the reason for inertia. One conclusion that can be drawn from Mach's principle is the concept of "rotational entropy" which can be understood as the requirement that 1) all local rotational motion is decreasing, and 2) mediated by Mach's principle, all local rotational motion is imparted to the total rotational motion of the entire universe. This transfer continues until such time as what may be considered the final rotational
> > > > > > > That would predict rotational chaos.
> > > > > > > And it does not exist.
> > > > > > > The universe as a whole does not have a center of which to rotate around.
> > > > > > > If mach predicted rotation to go away why hasn't it?
> > > > > > > That form of motion is not going away....
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > The precession of the gyroscope is a piece of a posteriori synthetic knowledge which, while it can be precisely described by mathematical expressions, is an utter mystery as to why it occurs in the first place.. The gravity-defying free end of a spinning gyroscope constitutes a perfectly consistent proof of the existence of God.
> > > > > Don't we push its rotation?
> > > > > The earth is not a gyroscope. Its turning cancels its primary G weight.
> > > > > There is more weight at the pole for the same energy/mass than
> > > > > at the rotating equator.
> > > > > > > A gyroscope gets braced in space by horizontal rotation weight.
> > > > > > > If it is tilted its rotation weight goes away.
> > > > > > The gyroscopic phenomenon is epi-Newtonian and epi-Hamiltonian. We have no mechanics that fully describe it. There is no equation in mechanics that relates a force vector at the unsupported end of a rotating mass to the gravitational field vector at the unsupported end of a rotating mass.. And that is and end to it, Mitch.
> > > > > It is the orientation that changes the turning gyroscope weight in gravity.
> > > > > A turning wheel on the road will have almost no vertical rotation weight.
> > > > Mitch, do you have a toy gyroscope? Get it out then post to me. We will perform a demonstration right here in this in real time.
> > > No I don't.
> > > I believe weight brace is going away where you tilt it.
> > No worries Mitch. I have a wonderful toy gyroscope which I keep on the same shelf as my teddy bears. It weights almost two pounds, is over 6 inches in diameter, is enclosed in a plastic cover, and has a cranking port so I can really whip up the rpms.
> >
> > I have attached a string to the ceiling. I am now dangling the gyroscope from that string while holding the other end with my fingers. The axis is level and parallel with the floor. It is not spinning. Now I'm letting go with my fingers. The gyroscope rotated down 90 degrees so that it is now dangling from the ceiling with the axis now vertical to the floor--string end is high and the other end I held in my fingers is low. Now I'll bring the axis back up to level with the floor and spin up
> >
> > Okay, the gyro is really humming! The string and my fingers are holding the axis level to the floor again. Now I'm going to let go with my fingers.....LOOK AT THAT! The loose end doesn't rotate down this time! Yes, it's precessing. But the precession is far less dramatic and far less interesting than the gravity-defying end of the gyro hanging there in mid air. The axis is absolutely level with the floor and no visible means of support.
> >
> > This MIT schiester thinks he has solved the riddle https://youtu.be/XPUuF_dECVI?si=OnAfXs6N_jn0LoM3&t=1698
> if you are dangling the gyroscope from that string while holding the
> other end with your fingers... you owe Einstein royaltities fees.
> --
> The Starmaker -- To question the unquestionable, ask the unaskable,
> to think the unthinkable, mention the unmentionable, say the unsayable,
> and challenge the unchallengeable.
Anyone have Einstein's patent number?

patdolan wrote:
>
> On Friday, November 24, 2023 at 9:23:27 PM UTC-8, The Starmaker wrote:
> > patdolan wrote:
> > >
> > > On Friday, November 24, 2023 at 7:10:42 PM UTC-8, mitchr...@gmail.com wrote:
> > > > On Friday, November 24, 2023 at 6:16:27 PM UTC-8, patdolan wrote:
> > > > > On Friday, November 24, 2023 at 5:53:45 PM UTC-8, mitchr...@gmail.com wrote:
> > > > > > On Wednesday, November 22, 2023 at 9:21:08 PM UTC-8, patdolan wrote:
> > > > > > > On Wednesday, November 22, 2023 at 8:35:08 PM UTC-8, mitchr...@gmail.com wrote:
> > > > > > > > On Wednesday, November 22, 2023 at 6:39:34 PM UTC-8, patdolan wrote:
> > > > > > > > > On Wednesday, November 22, 2023 at 5:29:42 PM UTC-8, mitchr...@gmail.com wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > In astronomy if gravity slows down rotation
> > > > > > > > > > where is the evidence?
> > > > > > > > > > The age of the universe would show most
> > > > > > > > > > objects should have already.
> > > > > > > > > > But they all have significant rotations.
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > Mitchell Raemsch
> > > > > > > > > Mitch, my man, somewhere I read that Mach's principle is the reason for inertia. One conclusion that can be drawn from Mach's principle is the concept of "rotational entropy" which can be understood as the requirement that 1) all local rotational motion is decreasing, and 2) mediated by Mach's principle, all local rotational motion is imparted to the total rotational motion of the entire universe. This transfer continues until such time as what may be considered the final rotatio
> > > > > > > > That would predict rotational chaos.
> > > > > > > > And it does not exist.
> > > > > > > > The universe as a whole does not have a center of which to rotate around.
> > > > > > > > If mach predicted rotation to go away why hasn't it?
> > > > > > > > That form of motion is not going away....
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > The precession of the gyroscope is a piece of a posteriori synthetic knowledge which, while it can be precisely described by mathematical expressions, is an utter mystery as to why it occurs in the first place. The gravity-defying free end of a spinning gyroscope constitutes a perfectly consistent proof of the existence of God.
> > > > > > Don't we push its rotation?
> > > > > > The earth is not a gyroscope. Its turning cancels its primary G weight.
> > > > > > There is more weight at the pole for the same energy/mass than
> > > > > > at the rotating equator.
> > > > > > > > A gyroscope gets braced in space by horizontal rotation weight.
> > > > > > > > If it is tilted its rotation weight goes away.
> > > > > > > The gyroscopic phenomenon is epi-Newtonian and epi-Hamiltonian. We have no mechanics that fully describe it. There is no equation in mechanics that relates a force vector at the unsupported end of a rotating mass to the gravitational field vector at the unsupported end of a rotating mass. And that is and end to it, Mitch.
> > > > > > It is the orientation that changes the turning gyroscope weight in gravity.
> > > > > > A turning wheel on the road will have almost no vertical rotation weight.
> > > > > Mitch, do you have a toy gyroscope? Get it out then post to me. We will perform a demonstration right here in this in real time.
> > > > No I don't.
> > > > I believe weight brace is going away where you tilt it.
> > > No worries Mitch. I have a wonderful toy gyroscope which I keep on the same shelf as my teddy bears. It weights almost two pounds, is over 6 inches in diameter, is enclosed in a plastic cover, and has a cranking port so I can really whip up the rpms.
> > >
> > > I have attached a string to the ceiling. I am now dangling the gyroscope from that string while holding the other end with my fingers. The axis is level and parallel with the floor. It is not spinning. Now I'm letting go with my fingers. The gyroscope rotated down 90 degrees so that it is now dangling from the ceiling with the axis now vertical to the floor--string end is high and the other end I held in my fingers is low. Now I'll bring the axis back up to level with the floor and spin up
> > >
> > > Okay, the gyro is really humming! The string and my fingers are holding the axis level to the floor again. Now I'm going to let go with my fingers....LOOK AT THAT! The loose end doesn't rotate down this time! Yes, it's precessing. But the precession is far less dramatic and far less interesting than the gravity-defying end of the gyro hanging there in mid air. The axis is absolutely level with the floor and no visible means of support.
> > >
> > > This MIT schiester thinks he has solved the riddle https://youtu.be/XPUuF_dECVI?si=OnAfXs6N_jn0LoM3&t=1698
> > if you are dangling the gyroscope from that string while holding the
> > other end with your fingers... you owe Einstein royaltities fees.
> > --
> > The Starmaker -- To question the unquestionable, ask the unaskable,
> > to think the unthinkable, mention the unmentionable, say the unsayable,
> > and challenge the unchallengeable.
> Anyone have Einstein's patent number?

https://books.google.com/books/content?id=EoMixQWUj6oC&pg=PA160&img=1&zoom=3&hl=en&sig=ACfU3U2FKw90EXnDjk31v3VUzN9zGY8DGg&w=1280

check with the patent office in Zurich.

--
The Starmaker -- To question the unquestionable, ask the unaskable,
to think the unthinkable, mention the unmentionable, say the unsayable,
and challenge the unchallengeable.

The Starmaker wrote:
>
> patdolan wrote:
> >
> > On Friday, November 24, 2023 at 9:23:27 PM UTC-8, The Starmaker wrote:
> > > patdolan wrote:
> > > >
> > > > On Friday, November 24, 2023 at 7:10:42 PM UTC-8, mitchr...@gmail.com wrote:
> > > > > On Friday, November 24, 2023 at 6:16:27 PM UTC-8, patdolan wrote:
> > > > > > On Friday, November 24, 2023 at 5:53:45 PM UTC-8, mitchr...@gmail.com wrote:
> > > > > > > On Wednesday, November 22, 2023 at 9:21:08 PM UTC-8, patdolan wrote:
> > > > > > > > On Wednesday, November 22, 2023 at 8:35:08 PM UTC-8, mitchr...@gmail.com wrote:
> > > > > > > > > On Wednesday, November 22, 2023 at 6:39:34 PM UTC-8, patdolan wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > On Wednesday, November 22, 2023 at 5:29:42 PM UTC-8, mitchr...@gmail.com wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > > In astronomy if gravity slows down rotation
> > > > > > > > > > > where is the evidence?
> > > > > > > > > > > The age of the universe would show most
> > > > > > > > > > > objects should have already.
> > > > > > > > > > > But they all have significant rotations.
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > Mitchell Raemsch
> > > > > > > > > > Mitch, my man, somewhere I read that Mach's principle is the reason for inertia. One conclusion that can be drawn from Mach's principle is the concept of "rotational entropy" which can be understood as the requirement that 1) all local rotational motion is decreasing, and 2) mediated by Mach's principle, all local rotational motion is imparted to the total rotational motion of the entire universe. This transfer continues until such time as what may be considered the final rotat
> > > > > > > > > That would predict rotational chaos.
> > > > > > > > > And it does not exist.
> > > > > > > > > The universe as a whole does not have a center of which to rotate around.
> > > > > > > > > If mach predicted rotation to go away why hasn't it?
> > > > > > > > > That form of motion is not going away....
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > The precession of the gyroscope is a piece of a posteriori synthetic knowledge which, while it can be precisely described by mathematical expressions, is an utter mystery as to why it occurs in the first place. The gravity-defying free end of a spinning gyroscope constitutes a perfectly consistent proof of the existence of God.
> > > > > > > Don't we push its rotation?
> > > > > > > The earth is not a gyroscope. Its turning cancels its primary G weight.
> > > > > > > There is more weight at the pole for the same energy/mass than
> > > > > > > at the rotating equator.
> > > > > > > > > A gyroscope gets braced in space by horizontal rotation weight.
> > > > > > > > > If it is tilted its rotation weight goes away.
> > > > > > > > The gyroscopic phenomenon is epi-Newtonian and epi-Hamiltonian. We have no mechanics that fully describe it. There is no equation in mechanics that relates a force vector at the unsupported end of a rotating mass to the gravitational field vector at the unsupported end of a rotating mass. And that is and end to it, Mitch.
> > > > > > > It is the orientation that changes the turning gyroscope weight in gravity.
> > > > > > > A turning wheel on the road will have almost no vertical rotation weight.
> > > > > > Mitch, do you have a toy gyroscope? Get it out then post to me. We will perform a demonstration right here in this in real time.
> > > > > No I don't.
> > > > > I believe weight brace is going away where you tilt it.
> > > > No worries Mitch. I have a wonderful toy gyroscope which I keep on the same shelf as my teddy bears. It weights almost two pounds, is over 6 inches in diameter, is enclosed in a plastic cover, and has a cranking port so I can really whip up the rpms.
> > > >
> > > > I have attached a string to the ceiling. I am now dangling the gyroscope from that string while holding the other end with my fingers. The axis is level and parallel with the floor. It is not spinning. Now I'm letting go with my fingers. The gyroscope rotated down 90 degrees so that it is now dangling from the ceiling with the axis now vertical to the floor--string end is high and the other end I held in my fingers is low. Now I'll bring the axis back up to level with the floor and spin up
> > > >
> > > > Okay, the gyro is really humming! The string and my fingers are holding the axis level to the floor again. Now I'm going to let go with my fingers....LOOK AT THAT! The loose end doesn't rotate down this time! Yes, it's precessing. But the precession is far less dramatic and far less interesting than the gravity-defying end of the gyro hanging there in mid air. The axis is absolutely level with the floor and no visible means of support.
> > > >
> > > > This MIT schiester thinks he has solved the riddle https://youtu.be/XPUuF_dECVI?si=OnAfXs6N_jn0LoM3&t=1698
> > > if you are dangling the gyroscope from that string while holding the
> > > other end with your fingers... you owe Einstein royaltities fees.
> > > --
> > > The Starmaker -- To question the unquestionable, ask the unaskable,
> > > to think the unthinkable, mention the unmentionable, say the unsayable,
> > > and challenge the unchallengeable.
> > Anyone have Einstein's patent number?
>
> https://books.google.com/books/content?id=EoMixQWUj6oC&pg=PA160&img=1&zoom=3&hl=en&sig=ACfU3U2FKw90EXnDjk31v3VUzN9zGY8DGg&w=1280
>
> check with the patent office in Zurich.

i have the patent number somewhere....why do you need a patent number? you read german?

https://einstein-website.de/en/faq/
Einstein had worked at the Patent Office (Swiss Office for Intellectual Property) for some years in Bern.

he owned more then twenty patents. However, always together with a partner. With the industrial Hermann Anschütz-Kaempfe a patent for a gyroscopic compass

i thought i found a Einstein patent for a time machine but it turn out somebody else took out the patent based on einstein' relativity.

--
The Starmaker -- To question the unquestionable, ask the unaskable,
to think the unthinkable, mention the unmentionable, say the unsayable,
and challenge the unchallengeable.

Volney wrote:

> On 11/23/2023 11:36 PM, patdolan wrote:
>
>> Tell this forum, if you can, the source of the force opposing gravity
>> in the former case.
>
> So you don't even understand Newtonian mechanics yet you think you are
> smart enough to claim relativity is wrong? Learn Newtonian mechanics
> first.

I just had a good meal, with wine and shit, and I want to announce alot of
progress in my "𝗢𝗻_𝘁𝗵𝗲_𝗗𝗶𝘃𝗲𝗿𝗴𝗲𝗻𝘁_𝗠𝗮𝘁𝗲𝗿_𝗼𝗳_𝘁𝗵𝗲_𝗠𝗼𝘃𝗶𝗻𝗴_𝗞𝗼𝗲𝗿𝗽𝗲𝗿𝘀_𝗠𝗼𝗱𝗲𝗹".

firstly, conform 𝗺𝗮𝗰𝗿𝗼_𝘀𝗰𝗮𝗹𝗲, there is no other reason, or 𝗮𝗰𝘁𝗶𝗼𝗻, for a body
to fall in 𝗳𝗿𝗲𝗲𝗳𝗮𝗹𝗹, without a force, or any, applied. But the earth surface
𝗮𝗽𝗽𝗿𝗼𝗮𝗰𝗵𝗶𝗻𝗴, in action, to the 𝘀𝗹𝗼𝘄𝗲𝗿_𝗲𝘅𝗽𝗮𝗻𝗱𝗶𝗻𝗴_𝗞𝗼𝗲𝗿𝗽𝗲𝗿. This is concluded.

moreover, this 𝗱𝗶𝘃𝗲𝗿𝗴𝗲𝗻𝗰𝗲 is actually the work of 𝗘𝗻𝘁𝗿𝗼𝗽𝘆, without which, you
have no 𝗘𝗻𝘁𝗿𝗼𝗽𝘆, hence 𝗻𝗼_𝘁𝗶𝗺𝗲_𝗽𝗮𝘀𝘀𝗮𝗴𝗲 one direction. Yes, it's ONE
direction, like "𝗴𝗿𝗮𝘃𝗶𝘁𝘆". Plus remark this, in relativity

1 + 1 = 1 and also 𝗶𝗻𝗳𝗶𝗻𝗶𝘁𝘆 + 𝗶𝗻𝗳𝗶𝗻𝗶𝘁𝘆 = 𝗶𝗻𝗳𝗶𝗻𝗶𝘁𝘆. Very funny indeed. My friend??

On 11/25/2023 3:31 PM, Baldemar Baburkin wrote:
>
>
> I just had a good meal, with wine and shit, and I want to announce alot of
> progress in my "𝗢𝗻_𝘁𝗵𝗲_𝗗𝗶𝘃𝗲𝗿𝗴𝗲𝗻𝘁_𝗠𝗮𝘁𝗲𝗿_𝗼𝗳_𝘁𝗵𝗲_𝗠𝗼𝘃𝗶𝗻𝗴_𝗞𝗼𝗲𝗿𝗽𝗲𝗿𝘀_𝗠𝗼𝗱𝗲𝗹".
>
> firstly, conform 𝗺𝗮𝗰𝗿𝗼_𝘀𝗰𝗮𝗹𝗲, there is no other reason, or 𝗮𝗰𝘁𝗶𝗼𝗻, for a body
> to fall in 𝗳𝗿𝗲𝗲𝗳𝗮𝗹𝗹, without a force, or any, applied. But the earth surface
> 𝗮𝗽𝗽𝗿𝗼𝗮𝗰𝗵𝗶𝗻𝗴, in action, to the 𝘀𝗹𝗼𝘄𝗲𝗿_𝗲𝘅𝗽𝗮𝗻𝗱𝗶𝗻𝗴_𝗞𝗼𝗲𝗿𝗽𝗲𝗿. This is concluded.
>
> moreover, this 𝗱𝗶𝘃𝗲𝗿𝗴𝗲𝗻𝗰𝗲 is actually the work of 𝗘𝗻𝘁𝗿𝗼𝗽𝘆, without which, you
> have no 𝗘𝗻𝘁𝗿𝗼𝗽𝘆, hence 𝗻𝗼_𝘁𝗶𝗺𝗲_𝗽𝗮𝘀𝘀𝗮𝗴𝗲 one direction. Yes, it's ONE
> direction, like "𝗴𝗿𝗮𝘃𝗶𝘁𝘆". Plus remark this, in relativity
>
> 1 + 1 = 1 and also 𝗶𝗻𝗳𝗶𝗻𝗶𝘁𝘆 + 𝗶𝗻𝗳𝗶𝗻𝗶𝘁𝘆 = 𝗶𝗻𝗳𝗶𝗻𝗶𝘁𝘆. Very funny indeed. My friend??

Piss off Hanson.

Physfitfreak wrote:

>> 1 + 1 = 1 and also 𝗶𝗻𝗳𝗶𝗻𝗶𝘁𝘆 + 𝗶𝗻𝗳𝗶𝗻𝗶𝘁𝘆 = 𝗶𝗻𝗳𝗶𝗻𝗶𝘁𝘆. Very funny indeed.
>> My friend??
>
> Piss off Hanson.

you talk like a 𝘃𝗶𝘀𝗶𝘁𝗶𝗻𝗴_𝗽𝗿𝗼𝗳𝗲𝘀𝘀𝗼𝗿.

𝗨𝗸𝗿𝗮𝗶𝗻𝗲_𝗻𝗲𝗲𝗱𝘀_‘𝘁𝗵𝗿𝗲𝗲_𝘃𝗶𝗰𝘁𝗼𝗿𝗶𝗲𝘀’_𝗼𝗻_𝗱𝗶𝗽𝗹𝗼𝗺𝗮𝘁𝗶𝗰_𝗳𝗿𝗼𝗻𝘁_–_𝗭𝗲𝗹𝗲𝗻𝘀𝗸𝘆
Kiev has to work out issues with the US Congress and the EU to keep
getting aid, the Ukrainian president says
https://r%74.com/russia/587993-zelensky-three-victories-ukraine-needs/

The nazis want to get a permanent pension from EU and USA + weapons

The smelly green midget is delusional.

More like 3 steps to con & bankrupt the West...LOL

Why dont this moron never shave?
One has to wake up & 𝘁𝗮𝗸𝗲 𝗮 𝗵𝗼𝗹𝗱 𝗼𝗳 𝗮𝗹𝗹 𝗼𝗻𝗲'𝘀 𝘀𝗲𝗻𝘀𝗲𝘀 for that to happen.

When the end comes for Zelensky... it will be swift... just need to look
at Saigon and Kabul

I think cocaine blocks blood flow to the brain.

The taxpayers in EU and USA needs ONE victory and it is victory over the
𝗽𝗮𝗿𝗮𝘀𝗶𝘁𝗲𝘀 𝗶𝗻 𝗨𝗸𝗿𝗮𝗶𝗻𝗲.

If I read the cocaine addicted Kiev beggars words it is all about the
money and he is happy to keep sending his people to die. Life expectancy
on the front for Ukraine forced conscripts is down from 4 hours to between
2-3 hours now and all he talks about is money.

Zelensky is an army deserter -

On Friday, November 24, 2023 at 9:34:29 PM UTC-8, mitchr...@gmail.com wrote:
> On Friday, November 24, 2023 at 7:44:50 PM UTC-8, patdolan wrote:
> > On Friday, November 24, 2023 at 7:10:42 PM UTC-8, mitchr...@gmail.com wrote:
> > > On Friday, November 24, 2023 at 6:16:27 PM UTC-8, patdolan wrote:
> > > > On Friday, November 24, 2023 at 5:53:45 PM UTC-8, mitchr...@gmail.com wrote:
> > > > > On Wednesday, November 22, 2023 at 9:21:08 PM UTC-8, patdolan wrote:
> > > > > > On Wednesday, November 22, 2023 at 8:35:08 PM UTC-8, mitchr...@gmail.com wrote:
> > > > > > > On Wednesday, November 22, 2023 at 6:39:34 PM UTC-8, patdolan wrote:
> > > > > > > > On Wednesday, November 22, 2023 at 5:29:42 PM UTC-8, mitchr...@gmail.com wrote:
> > > > > > > > > In astronomy if gravity slows down rotation
> > > > > > > > > where is the evidence?
> > > > > > > > > The age of the universe would show most
> > > > > > > > > objects should have already.
> > > > > > > > > But they all have significant rotations.
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Mitchell Raemsch
> > > > > > > > Mitch, my man, somewhere I read that Mach's principle is the reason for inertia. One conclusion that can be drawn from Mach's principle is the concept of "rotational entropy" which can be understood as the requirement that 1) all local rotational motion is decreasing, and 2) mediated by Mach's principle, all local rotational motion is imparted to the total rotational motion of the entire universe. This transfer continues until such time as what may be considered the final rotational state of the universe, or "rotational heat death" pertains everywhere in the universe. So "rotation" as a definable state of motion, is no longer detectable.
> > > > > > > That would predict rotational chaos.
> > > > > > > And it does not exist.
> > > > > > > The universe as a whole does not have a center of which to rotate around.
> > > > > > > If mach predicted rotation to go away why hasn't it?
> > > > > > > That form of motion is not going away....
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > The precession of the gyroscope is a piece of a posteriori synthetic knowledge which, while it can be precisely described by mathematical expressions, is an utter mystery as to why it occurs in the first place.. The gravity-defying free end of a spinning gyroscope constitutes a perfectly consistent proof of the existence of God.
> > > > > Don't we push its rotation?
> > > > > The earth is not a gyroscope. Its turning cancels its primary G weight.
> > > > > There is more weight at the pole for the same energy/mass than
> > > > > at the rotating equator.
> > > > > > > A gyroscope gets braced in space by horizontal rotation weight.
> > > > > > > If it is tilted its rotation weight goes away.
> > > > > > The gyroscopic phenomenon is epi-Newtonian and epi-Hamiltonian. We have no mechanics that fully describe it. There is no equation in mechanics that relates a force vector at the unsupported end of a rotating mass to the gravitational field vector at the unsupported end of a rotating mass.. And that is and end to it, Mitch.
> > > > > It is the orientation that changes the turning gyroscope weight in gravity.
> > > > > A turning wheel on the road will have almost no vertical rotation weight.
> > > > Mitch, do you have a toy gyroscope? Get it out then post to me. We will perform a demonstration right here in this in real time.
> > > No I don't.
> > > I believe weight brace is going away where you tilt it.
> > No worries Mitch. I have a wonderful toy gyroscope which I keep on the same shelf as my teddy bears. It weights almost two pounds, is over 6 inches in diameter, is enclosed in a plastic cover, and has a cranking port so I can really whip up the rpms.
> >
> > I have attached a string to the ceiling. I am now dangling the gyroscope from that string while holding the other end with my fingers. The axis is level and parallel with the floor. It is not spinning. Now I'm letting go with my fingers. The gyroscope rotated down 90 degrees so that it is now dangling from the ceiling with the axis now vertical to the floor--string end is high and the other end I held in my fingers is low. Now I'll bring the axis back up to level with the floor and spin up the gyro real good...
> >
> > Okay, the gyro is really humming! The string and my fingers are holding the axis level to the floor again. Now I'm going to let go with my fingers.....LOOK AT THAT! The loose end doesn't rotate down this time! Yes, it's precessing. But the precession is far less dramatic and far less interesting than the gravity-defying end of the gyro hanging there in mid air. The axis is absolutely level with the floor and no visible means of support.
> >
> > This MIT schiester thinks he has solved the riddle https://youtu.be/XPUuF_dECVI?si=OnAfXs6N_jn0LoM3&t=1698
> I always felt it braced in space. Heavy to the tilt.
> You are suggesting it is braced tilted horizontal?
> I believe that is its natural gravitational orientation.
> If you tilt it all of the way and leave it alone
> it would remain horizontal.
Mitch, I have just now realized the value of your term "braced in space" regarding the gyroscope. Brilliant. Now consider this: while there is "precession math" there exists no "braced math". And I defy any relativist to gainsay me in this matter.

Physfitfreak wrote:
>
> On 11/25/2023 3:31 PM, Baldemar Baburkin wrote:

> Piss off Hanson.

where did you get the idea dat dis guy name is Hanson?

--
The Starmaker -- To question the unquestionable, ask the unaskable,
to think the unthinkable, mention the unmentionable, say the unsayable,
and challenge the unchallengeable.

On 11/26/2023 3:30 PM, The Starmaker wrote:
> Physfitfreak wrote:
>>
>> On 11/25/2023 3:31 PM, Baldemar Baburkin wrote:
>
>> Piss off Hanson.
>
> where did you get the idea dat dis guy name is Hanson?
>
>
>
>

By detecting the same character in him. And some of the same idiotic
terminologies. He thinks he's smart.

Physfitfreak wrote:
>
> On 11/26/2023 3:30 PM, The Starmaker wrote:
> > Physfitfreak wrote:
> >>
> >> On 11/25/2023 3:31 PM, Baldemar Baburkin wrote:
> >
> >> Piss off Hanson.
> >
> > where did you get the idea dat dis guy name is Hanson?
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
> By detecting the same character in him. And some of the same idiotic
> terminologies. He thinks he's smart.

are you sayin that there is someone posting on usenet with the
handle...Hanson?

--
The Starmaker -- To question the unquestionable, ask the unaskable,
to think the unthinkable, mention the unmentionable, say the unsayable,
and challenge the unchallengeable.

On Sunday, November 26, 2023 at 11:10:03 AM UTC-8, mitchr...@gmail.com wrote:
> On Sunday, November 26, 2023 at 8:19:32 AM UTC-8, patdolan wrote:
> > On Friday, November 24, 2023 at 9:34:29 PM UTC-8, mitchr...@gmail.com wrote:
> > > On Friday, November 24, 2023 at 7:44:50 PM UTC-8, patdolan wrote:
> > > > On Friday, November 24, 2023 at 7:10:42 PM UTC-8, mitchr...@gmail.com wrote:
> > > > > On Friday, November 24, 2023 at 6:16:27 PM UTC-8, patdolan wrote:
> > > > > > On Friday, November 24, 2023 at 5:53:45 PM UTC-8, mitchr...@gmail.com wrote:
> > > > > > > On Wednesday, November 22, 2023 at 9:21:08 PM UTC-8, patdolan wrote:
> > > > > > > > On Wednesday, November 22, 2023 at 8:35:08 PM UTC-8, mitchr...@gmail.com wrote:
> > > > > > > > > On Wednesday, November 22, 2023 at 6:39:34 PM UTC-8, patdolan wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > On Wednesday, November 22, 2023 at 5:29:42 PM UTC-8, mitchr...@gmail.com wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > > In astronomy if gravity slows down rotation
> > > > > > > > > > > where is the evidence?
> > > > > > > > > > > The age of the universe would show most
> > > > > > > > > > > objects should have already.
> > > > > > > > > > > But they all have significant rotations.
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > Mitchell Raemsch
> > > > > > > > > > Mitch, my man, somewhere I read that Mach's principle is the reason for inertia. One conclusion that can be drawn from Mach's principle is the concept of "rotational entropy" which can be understood as the requirement that 1) all local rotational motion is decreasing, and 2) mediated by Mach's principle, all local rotational motion is imparted to the total rotational motion of the entire universe. This transfer continues until such time as what may be considered the final rotational state of the universe, or "rotational heat death" pertains everywhere in the universe. So "rotation" as a definable state of motion, is no longer detectable.
> > > > > > > > > That would predict rotational chaos.
> > > > > > > > > And it does not exist.
> > > > > > > > > The universe as a whole does not have a center of which to rotate around.
> > > > > > > > > If mach predicted rotation to go away why hasn't it?
> > > > > > > > > That form of motion is not going away....
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > The precession of the gyroscope is a piece of a posteriori synthetic knowledge which, while it can be precisely described by mathematical expressions, is an utter mystery as to why it occurs in the first place. The gravity-defying free end of a spinning gyroscope constitutes a perfectly consistent proof of the existence of God.
> > > > > > > Don't we push its rotation?
> > > > > > > The earth is not a gyroscope. Its turning cancels its primary G weight.
> > > > > > > There is more weight at the pole for the same energy/mass than
> > > > > > > at the rotating equator.
> > > > > > > > > A gyroscope gets braced in space by horizontal rotation weight.
> > > > > > > > > If it is tilted its rotation weight goes away.
> > > > > > > > The gyroscopic phenomenon is epi-Newtonian and epi-Hamiltonian. We have no mechanics that fully describe it. There is no equation in mechanics that relates a force vector at the unsupported end of a rotating mass to the gravitational field vector at the unsupported end of a rotating mass. And that is and end to it, Mitch.
> > > > > > > It is the orientation that changes the turning gyroscope weight in gravity.
> > > > > > > A turning wheel on the road will have almost no vertical rotation weight.
> > > > > > Mitch, do you have a toy gyroscope? Get it out then post to me. We will perform a demonstration right here in this in real time.
> > > > > No I don't.
> > > > > I believe weight brace is going away where you tilt it.
> > > > No worries Mitch. I have a wonderful toy gyroscope which I keep on the same shelf as my teddy bears. It weights almost two pounds, is over 6 inches in diameter, is enclosed in a plastic cover, and has a cranking port so I can really whip up the rpms.
> > > >
> > > > I have attached a string to the ceiling. I am now dangling the gyroscope from that string while holding the other end with my fingers. The axis is level and parallel with the floor. It is not spinning. Now I'm letting go with my fingers. The gyroscope rotated down 90 degrees so that it is now dangling from the ceiling with the axis now vertical to the floor--string end is high and the other end I held in my fingers is low. Now I'll bring the axis back up to level with the floor and spin up the gyro real good...
> > > >
> > > > Okay, the gyro is really humming! The string and my fingers are holding the axis level to the floor again. Now I'm going to let go with my fingers....LOOK AT THAT! The loose end doesn't rotate down this time! Yes, it's precessing. But the precession is far less dramatic and far less interesting than the gravity-defying end of the gyro hanging there in mid air. The axis is absolutely level with the floor and no visible means of support.
> > > >
> > > > This MIT schiester thinks he has solved the riddle https://youtu.be/XPUuF_dECVI?si=OnAfXs6N_jn0LoM3&t=1698
> > > I always felt it braced in space. Heavy to the tilt.
> > > You are suggesting it is braced tilted horizontal?
> > > I believe that is its natural gravitational orientation.
> > > If you tilt it all of the way and leave it alone
> > > it would remain horizontal.
> > Mitch, I have just now realized the value of your term "braced in space" regarding the gyroscope. Brilliant. Now consider this: while there is "precession math" there exists no "braced math". And I defy any relativist to gainsay me in this matter.
> I predict one further thing. Where the rotation stops the gyroscope brace will go away
> and the hanging gyroscope will fall back to its vertical axis.
> Any rotation keeps the brace but without it it goes away.
You predict this, Mitch? Ahem...say Mitch, what do you make of the Dzhanibekov Effect?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1VPfZ_XzisU

Notice that the rotation is always in the same direction. Also note that there is no "Dzhanibekov math" to explain it.

On 11/26/2023 4:09 PM, The Starmaker wrote:
> Physfitfreak wrote:
>>
>> On 11/26/2023 3:30 PM, The Starmaker wrote:
>>> Physfitfreak wrote:
>>>>
>>>> On 11/25/2023 3:31 PM, Baldemar Baburkin wrote:
>>>
>>>> Piss off Hanson.
>>>
>>> where did you get the idea dat dis guy name is Hanson?
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>> By detecting the same character in him. And some of the same idiotic
>> terminologies. He thinks he's smart.
>
> are you sayin that there is someone posting on usenet with the
> handle...Hanson?
>
>

You don't remember the garbage he was posting?

On Sunday, November 26, 2023 at 4:58:16 PM UTC-8, mitchr...@gmail.com wrote:
> On Sunday, November 26, 2023 at 4:45:02 PM UTC-8, patdolan wrote:
> > On Sunday, November 26, 2023 at 11:10:03 AM UTC-8, mitchr...@gmail.com wrote:
> > > On Sunday, November 26, 2023 at 8:19:32 AM UTC-8, patdolan wrote:
> > > > On Friday, November 24, 2023 at 9:34:29 PM UTC-8, mitchr...@gmail.com wrote:
> > > > > On Friday, November 24, 2023 at 7:44:50 PM UTC-8, patdolan wrote:
> > > > > > On Friday, November 24, 2023 at 7:10:42 PM UTC-8, mitchr...@gmail.com wrote:
> > > > > > > On Friday, November 24, 2023 at 6:16:27 PM UTC-8, patdolan wrote:
> > > > > > > > On Friday, November 24, 2023 at 5:53:45 PM UTC-8, mitchr...@gmail.com wrote:
> > > > > > > > > On Wednesday, November 22, 2023 at 9:21:08 PM UTC-8, patdolan wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > On Wednesday, November 22, 2023 at 8:35:08 PM UTC-8, mitchr...@gmail.com wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > > On Wednesday, November 22, 2023 at 6:39:34 PM UTC-8, patdolan wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > > > On Wednesday, November 22, 2023 at 5:29:42 PM UTC-8, mitchr...@gmail.com wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > > > > In astronomy if gravity slows down rotation
> > > > > > > > > > > > > where is the evidence?
> > > > > > > > > > > > > The age of the universe would show most
> > > > > > > > > > > > > objects should have already.
> > > > > > > > > > > > > But they all have significant rotations.
> > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > Mitchell Raemsch
> > > > > > > > > > > > Mitch, my man, somewhere I read that Mach's principle is the reason for inertia. One conclusion that can be drawn from Mach's principle is the concept of "rotational entropy" which can be understood as the requirement that 1) all local rotational motion is decreasing, and 2) mediated by Mach's principle, all local rotational motion is imparted to the total rotational motion of the entire universe. This transfer continues until such time as what may be considered the final rotational state of the universe, or "rotational heat death" pertains everywhere in the universe. So "rotation" as a definable state of motion, is no longer detectable.
> > > > > > > > > > > That would predict rotational chaos.
> > > > > > > > > > > And it does not exist.
> > > > > > > > > > > The universe as a whole does not have a center of which to rotate around.
> > > > > > > > > > > If mach predicted rotation to go away why hasn't it?
> > > > > > > > > > > That form of motion is not going away....
> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > The precession of the gyroscope is a piece of a posteriori synthetic knowledge which, while it can be precisely described by mathematical expressions, is an utter mystery as to why it occurs in the first place. The gravity-defying free end of a spinning gyroscope constitutes a perfectly consistent proof of the existence of God.
> > > > > > > > > Don't we push its rotation?
> > > > > > > > > The earth is not a gyroscope. Its turning cancels its primary G weight.
> > > > > > > > > There is more weight at the pole for the same energy/mass than
> > > > > > > > > at the rotating equator.
> > > > > > > > > > > A gyroscope gets braced in space by horizontal rotation weight.
> > > > > > > > > > > If it is tilted its rotation weight goes away.
> > > > > > > > > > The gyroscopic phenomenon is epi-Newtonian and epi-Hamiltonian. We have no mechanics that fully describe it. There is no equation in mechanics that relates a force vector at the unsupported end of a rotating mass to the gravitational field vector at the unsupported end of a rotating mass. And that is and end to it, Mitch.
> > > > > > > > > It is the orientation that changes the turning gyroscope weight in gravity.
> > > > > > > > > A turning wheel on the road will have almost no vertical rotation weight.
> > > > > > > > Mitch, do you have a toy gyroscope? Get it out then post to me. We will perform a demonstration right here in this in real time.
> > > > > > > No I don't.
> > > > > > > I believe weight brace is going away where you tilt it.
> > > > > > No worries Mitch. I have a wonderful toy gyroscope which I keep on the same shelf as my teddy bears. It weights almost two pounds, is over 6 inches in diameter, is enclosed in a plastic cover, and has a cranking port so I can really whip up the rpms.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > I have attached a string to the ceiling. I am now dangling the gyroscope from that string while holding the other end with my fingers. The axis is level and parallel with the floor. It is not spinning. Now I'm letting go with my fingers. The gyroscope rotated down 90 degrees so that it is now dangling from the ceiling with the axis now vertical to the floor--string end is high and the other end I held in my fingers is low. Now I'll bring the axis back up to level with the floor and spin up the gyro real good....
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Okay, the gyro is really humming! The string and my fingers are holding the axis level to the floor again. Now I'm going to let go with my fingers....LOOK AT THAT! The loose end doesn't rotate down this time! Yes, it's precessing. But the precession is far less dramatic and far less interesting than the gravity-defying end of the gyro hanging there in mid air. The axis is absolutely level with the floor and no visible means of support..
> > > > > >
> > > > > > This MIT schiester thinks he has solved the riddle https://youtu.be/XPUuF_dECVI?si=OnAfXs6N_jn0LoM3&t=1698
> > > > > I always felt it braced in space. Heavy to the tilt.
> > > > > You are suggesting it is braced tilted horizontal?
> > > > > I believe that is its natural gravitational orientation.
> > > > > If you tilt it all of the way and leave it alone
> > > > > it would remain horizontal.
> > > > Mitch, I have just now realized the value of your term "braced in space" regarding the gyroscope. Brilliant. Now consider this: while there is "precession math" there exists no "braced math". And I defy any relativist to gainsay me in this matter.
> > > I predict one further thing. Where the rotation stops the gyroscope brace will go away
> > > and the hanging gyroscope will fall back to its vertical axis.
> > > Any rotation keeps the brace but without it it goes away.
> > You predict this, Mitch? Ahem...say Mitch, what do you make of the Dzhanibekov Effect?
> >
> What pushes the new flip? That starts over a little later?
> Is that a God push? You talked about another proof.
> I think so. Flip in space is another.
Now Mitch, take another look at the slo-mo. The rotation is always in the same direction, i.e., the angular momentum vector always points in the same direction of the universe. Also notice that the flip always occurs in a single revolution. If we had some Dzhanibekov math to work with, I will bet dollars to donuts that if you carefully work out the distribution of the moment of mass for that thing--or whatever they call it, the name escapes me at the moment--the angular momentum vector never deviates from it's direction even during the flip. Not even for a microsecond! So overpowering and absolute is the gyroscopic rule of directionality.

Mitch, I have grown weary and desire to sleep. Please figure out the Dzhanibekov math we need to solve this riddle and post it by morning. There's a good chap. Good night....

On 11/24/2023 12:16 AM, patdolan wrote:
> On Thursday, November 23, 2023 at 8:59:05 PM UTC-8, patdolan wrote:
>> On Thursday, November 23, 2023 at 8:36:28 PM UTC-8, patdolan wrote:

>>> If the gyroscope is spinning then the free end maintains it's z value when you remove your fingers from it. If the gyroscope is not spinning then the free end immediately falls to a minimum z value when you take your fingers away.
>>>
>>> Tell this forum, if you can, the source of the force opposing gravity in the former case
>> https://youtu.be/XPUuF_dECVI?si=OnAfXs6N_jn0LoM3&t=1698

The weight of the gyroscope is on the fixed end. If that is removed, it
will fall. Its weight is the same whether the gyroscope is spinning or not.

For a gyroscope whose axis is horizontal will have a torque applied to
it since most of its mass isn't over the fixed end. That torque is
countered by a torque created to keep the orientation the same
(conservation of angular momentum) plus the additional torque at right
angles to both causing the precession.
>
> Put another way, imagine a blind man who learned all of Newtonian, Lagrangian and Hamiltonian mechanics. He understood them perfectly. But he had never laid eyes on a gyroscope (how could he?). There is no possible way that this man could deduce the laws of precession, much less the gravity defying-behavior of the free end of a gyroscope from his knowledge of mechanics.

He could deduce precession if he understood the math predicting it, or
perhaps could derive precession if he started with a rotating mass (or
set of small masses moving in a circle/instantaneously moving in a line)
and worked out the math that will lead to a precession.

> Also, there is no way that even the seeing man, even now can derive the fact that gyroscopes desire to permanently maintain their orientation to the universe

And why not? The math isn't simple, but the math is understood.

On Monday, 27 November 2023 at 08:13:46 UTC+1, Volney wrote:

> He could deduce precession if he understood the math predicting it, or

And speaking of math - it's always good to remind
that your bunch of idiots had to announce its oldest,
very important and succesful part false, as it didn't
want to fit the madness of your idiot guru.

On Sunday, November 26, 2023 at 11:13:46 PM UTC-8, Volney wrote:
> On 11/24/2023 12:16 AM, patdolan wrote:
> > On Thursday, November 23, 2023 at 8:59:05 PM UTC-8, patdolan wrote:
> >> On Thursday, November 23, 2023 at 8:36:28 PM UTC-8, patdolan wrote:
>
> >>> If the gyroscope is spinning then the free end maintains it's z value when you remove your fingers from it. If the gyroscope is not spinning then the free end immediately falls to a minimum z value when you take your fingers away.
> >>>
> >>> Tell this forum, if you can, the source of the force opposing gravity in the former case
> >> https://youtu.be/XPUuF_dECVI?si=OnAfXs6N_jn0LoM3&t=1698
>
> The weight of the gyroscope is on the fixed end. If that is removed, it
> will fall. Its weight is the same whether the gyroscope is spinning or not.
>
> For a gyroscope whose axis is horizontal will have a torque applied to
> it since most of its mass isn't over the fixed end. That torque is
> countered by a torque created to keep the orientation the same

Now we are getting somewhere, Volroney. Let's call that second torque the "gyroscopic counter torque". I dare you Volroney, to derive the gyroscopic counter torque from first principles.

> (conservation of angular momentum) plus the additional torque at right
> angles to both causing the precession.

Torque can not be the source of gyroscopic precession because the precession has a constant angular velocity. If torque were the cause of precession then the precession velocity would continue to increase to to the speed of light.

Precession is an angular velocity that shows up instantaneously and is maintained by Father Soto Domingo's principle of inertia: An object in (circular) motion tends to remain in (circular) motion.

> >
> > Put another way, imagine a blind man who learned all of Newtonian, Lagrangian and Hamiltonian mechanics. He understood them perfectly. But he had never laid eyes on a gyroscope (how could he?). There is no possible way that this man could deduce the laws of precession, much less the gravity defying-behavior of the free end of a gyroscope from his knowledge of mechanics..
>
> He could deduce precession if he understood the math predicting it, or
> perhaps could derive precession if he started with a rotating mass (or
> set of small masses moving in a circle/instantaneously moving in a line)
> and worked out the math that will lead to a precession.
>
> > Also, there is no way that even the seeing man, even now can derive the fact that gyroscopes desire to permanently maintain their orientation to the universe
>
> And why not? The math isn't simple, but the math is understood.

Den 24.11.2023 23:25, skrev Richard Hertz:
> On Friday, November 24, 2023 at 2:37:52 PM UTC-3, Richard Hertz wrote:
>> As always, an opinionated asshole writing bullshit
>>
>> Explain this, Volney, about gyroscopes working in the ISS. Where is its main axis pointing?
>>
>> https://www.esa.int/ESA_Multimedia/Videos/2016/03/Gyroscopes_in_space
>>
>> "There is no up or down in space. Satellites track their pointing direction using the same approach as on submarines and aircraft:
>> fast-spinning gyroscopes that maintain a fixed orientation in the same way as a child’s spinning top. The International Space Station
>> has four big gyroscopes which are used for stabilization of the station".
>>
>> Now apply something of this to galaxies rotation curves and dark matter (or another unknown physics effect).
>
>
> Also, observe: no precession in the gyro experiment done in the ISS, as it was shown in the ESA video.
>
> Explain that too, Volney.

I am sure you sometime in your life have played with a spinning top.
If the spin axis isn't exactly vertical, it does precess.

If you spin it in the ISS, it will not precess regardless
of the direction of its axis.

What is the difference between the two cases, Richard? :-D

--
Paul

https://paulba.no/

On Monday, November 27, 2023 at 11:46:30 AM UTC-8, Paul B. Andersen wrote:
> Den 24.11.2023 23:25, skrev Richard Hertz:
> > On Friday, November 24, 2023 at 2:37:52 PM UTC-3, Richard Hertz wrote:
> >> As always, an opinionated asshole writing bullshit
> >>
> >> Explain this, Volney, about gyroscopes working in the ISS. Where is its main axis pointing?
> >>
> >> https://www.esa.int/ESA_Multimedia/Videos/2016/03/Gyroscopes_in_space
> >>
> >> "There is no up or down in space. Satellites track their pointing direction using the same approach as on submarines and aircraft:
> >> fast-spinning gyroscopes that maintain a fixed orientation in the same way as a child’s spinning top. The International Space Station
> >> has four big gyroscopes which are used for stabilization of the station".
> >>
> >> Now apply something of this to galaxies rotation curves and dark matter (or another unknown physics effect).
> >
> >
> > Also, observe: no precession in the gyro experiment done in the ISS, as it was shown in the ESA video.
> >
> > Explain that too, Volney.
> I am sure you sometime in your life have played with a spinning top.
> If the spin axis isn't exactly vertical, it does precess.
>
> If you spin it in the ISS, it will not precess regardless
> of the direction of its axis.
>
> What is the difference between the two cases, Richard? :-D
>
> --
> Paul
>
> https://paulba.no/
Wrong, professor Paul. The ISS gyroscope WILL precess. But only once per orbit. Just like a long, heavy pendulum.

Volney wrote:

>>>> Tell this forum, if you can, the source of the force opposing gravity
>>>> in the former case
>>> https://youtu.be/XPUuF_dECVI?si=OnAfXs6N_jn0LoM3&t=1698
>
> The weight of the gyroscope is on the fixed end. If that is removed, it
> will fall. Its weight is the same whether the gyroscope is spinning or
> not.

not quite true, the center of mass may go outside the body, I remember a
retrospective on Discovery chan, with a gyroscope and it's inventor,
lifting itself from the ground. Men here you have a true Jewish people,
𝘄𝗵𝗶𝗰𝗵 𝗱𝗲𝘀𝗲𝗿𝘃𝗲 𝗿𝗲𝘀𝗽𝗲𝗰𝘁, you are asking for. Those wankers from polakia and
america, traitors with double citizenship, are indeed 𝗱𝗲𝘀𝗽𝗶𝗰𝗮𝗯𝗹𝗲 𝗸𝗵𝗮𝘇𝗮𝗿
𝗖𝗵𝗮𝗯𝗮𝗱 𝗴𝗼𝘆𝘀. Dogs.

𝗭𝗶𝗼𝗻𝗶𝘀𝗺_𝗶𝘀_𝗮_𝗥𝗲𝗯𝗲𝗹𝗹𝗶𝗼𝗻_𝗔𝗴𝗮𝗶𝗻𝘀𝘁_𝘁𝗵𝗲_𝗔𝗹𝗺𝗶𝗴𝗵𝘁𝘆_-_𝗥𝗮𝗯𝗯𝗶_𝗘𝗹𝗵𝗮𝗻𝗮𝗻_𝗕𝗲𝗰𝗸
https://bi%74%63hute.com/video/rLsgWOTzBUk1

𝗠𝗮𝗱𝘂𝗿𝗼_𝗧𝗘𝗔𝗥𝗦_𝗜𝗦𝗥𝗔𝗘𝗟_𝗔𝗽𝗮𝗿𝘁_𝗟𝗶𝗸𝗲_𝗡𝗼_𝗢𝘁𝗵𝗲𝗿
https://bi%74%63hute.com/video/UO9zYuYMrp3Y

here a another despicable polaker khazar goy a𝘁𝘁𝗮𝗰𝗸𝗶𝗻𝗴 𝗝𝗲𝘄𝗶𝘀𝗵 𝗽𝗲𝗼𝗽𝗹𝗲.

𝗭𝗶𝗼𝗻𝗶𝘀𝘁 𝘁𝗼 𝗣𝗿𝗼-𝗣𝗮𝗹𝗲𝘀𝘁𝗶𝗻𝗶𝗮𝗻 𝗝𝗲𝘄𝘀 𝗛𝗶𝘁𝗹𝗲𝗿 𝗺𝗮𝗱𝗲 𝗮 𝗺𝗶𝘀𝘁𝗮𝗸𝗲, 𝗵𝗲 𝘀𝗵𝗼𝘂𝗹𝗱'𝘃𝗲 𝗽𝘂𝘁 𝘆𝗼𝘂 𝗶𝗻 𝘁𝗵𝗲
𝗴𝗮𝘀 𝗰𝗵𝗮𝗺𝗯𝗲𝗿𝘀
https://bi%74%63hute.com/video/xnveyK0a7dge

𝗧𝗿𝘂𝗱𝗲𝗮𝘂_𝗽𝗿𝗲𝗮𝗰𝗵𝗲𝘀_𝗮𝗴𝗮𝗶𝗻𝘀𝘁_𝗮𝗻𝘁𝗶-𝗦𝗲𝗺𝗶𝘁𝗶𝘀𝗺._𝗙𝗼𝗿𝗴𝗼𝘁_𝗵𝗲_𝗴𝗹𝗼𝗿𝗶𝗳𝗶𝗲𝗱_𝗮_𝗡𝗮𝘇𝗶
https://bi%74%63hute.com/video/lKJoi96UsIsK

𝗜𝘀𝗿𝗮𝗲𝗹_𝗗𝗲𝗮𝘁𝗵𝘀,𝗖𝗿𝗶𝘀𝗶𝘀_𝗔𝗰𝘁𝗼𝗿𝘀_𝗟𝗮𝘂𝗴𝗵𝗶𝗻𝗴_𝗔𝗯𝗼𝘂𝘁_𝗗𝗲𝗮𝗱_𝗣𝗮𝗿𝗲𝗻𝘁𝘀,𝗔𝗹𝗹_𝘀𝘁𝗮𝗴𝗲𝗱,𝗗𝘂𝗽𝗶𝗻𝗴_𝗗𝗲𝗹𝗶𝗴𝗵𝘁,_𝗘𝘅𝗽𝗼𝘀𝗲𝗱
https://bi%74%63hute.com/video/70ujw7un4DoD

watch this stinking lying sack of shit. Not even a dog.

𝗪𝗼𝘄,𝗪𝗵𝗮𝘁_𝗮_𝗗𝗶𝗳𝗳𝗲𝗿𝗲𝗻𝗰𝗲_𝗳𝗼𝗿_𝗞𝗶𝗿𝗯𝘆_𝗕𝗲𝘁𝘄𝗲𝗲𝗻_𝗨𝗸𝗿𝗮𝗶𝗻𝗶𝗮𝗻_𝗮𝗻𝗱_𝗣𝗮𝗹𝗲𝘀𝘁𝗶𝗻𝗶𝗮𝗻_𝗖𝗶𝘃𝗶𝗹𝗶𝗮𝗻𝘀_𝗕𝗲𝗶𝗻𝗴_𝗞𝗶𝗹𝗹𝗲𝗱
https://bi%74%63hute.com/video/e1XW76kYsFiV

Den 27.11.2023 20:50, skrev patdolan:
> On Monday, November 27, 2023 at 11:46:30 AM UTC-8, Paul B. Andersen wrote:
>> Den 24.11.2023 23:25, skrev Richard Hertz:
>>> On Friday, November 24, 2023 at 2:37:52 PM UTC-3, Richard Hertz wrote:
>>>> As always, an opinionated asshole writing bullshit
>>>>
>>>> Explain this, Volney, about gyroscopes working in the ISS. Where is its main axis pointing?
>>>>
>>>> https://www.esa.int/ESA_Multimedia/Videos/2016/03/Gyroscopes_in_space
>>>>
>>>> "There is no up or down in space. Satellites track their pointing direction using the same approach as on submarines and aircraft:
>>>> fast-spinning gyroscopes that maintain a fixed orientation in the same way as a child’s spinning top. The International Space Station
>>>> has four big gyroscopes which are used for stabilization of the station".
>>>>
>>>> Now apply something of this to galaxies rotation curves and dark matter (or another unknown physics effect).
>>>
>>>
>>> Also, observe: no precession in the gyro experiment done in the ISS, as it was shown in the ESA video.
>>>
>>> Explain that too, Volney.
>> I am sure you sometime in your life have played with a spinning top.
>> If the spin axis isn't exactly vertical, it does precess.
>>
>> If you spin it in the ISS, it will not precess regardless
>> of the direction of its axis.
>>
>> What is the difference between the two cases, Richard? :-D
>>
>> --
>> Paul
>>
>> https://paulba.no/

> Wrong, professor Paul. The ISS gyroscope WILL precess. But only once per orbit. Just like a long, heavy pendulum.

OK, I will give you a challenge.

The ISS will always face the same side towards the Earth,
so it is rotating once per orbit.

A gyro (or some object) is spinning in the ISS.
At some time, the spin axis is perpendicular to ISS' velocity
in the ECI-frame, and parallel to the surface of the Earth.
(Or in any other _well defined direction_, if you prefer.)

The challenge is to describe the motion of the spin axis
as the ISS orbits the Earth once.

Why do you call this motion "precession"?

Second challenge:
A long heavy pendulum is hanging under the ISS.
A stable situation is that the pendulum is always
pointing towards the centre of the Earth.

Which forces are acting on the pendulum mass?
Which forces are acting on the spinning gyro in the ISS?

--
Paul

https://paulba.no/

On Tuesday, November 28, 2023 at 2:38:09 AM UTC-8, Paul B. Andersen wrote:
> Den 27.11.2023 20:50, skrev patdolan:
> > On Monday, November 27, 2023 at 11:46:30 AM UTC-8, Paul B. Andersen wrote:
> >> Den 24.11.2023 23:25, skrev Richard Hertz:
> >>> On Friday, November 24, 2023 at 2:37:52 PM UTC-3, Richard Hertz wrote:
> >>>> As always, an opinionated asshole writing bullshit
> >>>>
> >>>> Explain this, Volney, about gyroscopes working in the ISS. Where is its main axis pointing?
> >>>>
> >>>> https://www.esa.int/ESA_Multimedia/Videos/2016/03/Gyroscopes_in_space
> >>>>
> >>>> "There is no up or down in space. Satellites track their pointing direction using the same approach as on submarines and aircraft:
> >>>> fast-spinning gyroscopes that maintain a fixed orientation in the same way as a child’s spinning top. The International Space Station
> >>>> has four big gyroscopes which are used for stabilization of the station".
> >>>>
> >>>> Now apply something of this to galaxies rotation curves and dark matter (or another unknown physics effect).
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> Also, observe: no precession in the gyro experiment done in the ISS, as it was shown in the ESA video.
> >>>
> >>> Explain that too, Volney.
> >> I am sure you sometime in your life have played with a spinning top.
> >> If the spin axis isn't exactly vertical, it does precess.
> >>
> >> If you spin it in the ISS, it will not precess regardless
> >> of the direction of its axis.
> >>
> >> What is the difference between the two cases, Richard? :-D
> >>
> >> --
> >> Paul
> >>
> >> https://paulba.no/
>
> > Wrong, professor Paul. The ISS gyroscope WILL precess. But only once per orbit. Just like a long, heavy pendulum.
> OK, I will give you a challenge.
>
> The ISS will always face the same side towards the Earth,
> so it is rotating once per orbit.
>
> A gyro (or some object) is spinning in the ISS.
> At some time, the spin axis is perpendicular to ISS' velocity
> in the ECI-frame, and parallel to the surface of the Earth.
> (Or in any other _well defined direction_, if you prefer.)
>
> The challenge is to describe the motion of the spin axis
> as the ISS orbits the Earth once.
>
> Why do you call this motion "precession"?
You are right. This is not precession. It is, as Mitch might put it, space-brace. Precession involves an applied torque which does not happen in the ISS example.
>
> Second challenge:
> A long heavy pendulum is hanging under the ISS.
> A stable situation is that the pendulum is always
> pointing towards the centre of the Earth.
>
> Which forces are acting on the pendulum mass?
Neither the sun's gravitational field nor the earth's gravitational field exerts a force on the pendulum you discribe. Because the pendulum is in free fall around both. Only Mach's mysterious trans-universe space-brace field acts on the pendulum and the ISS gyroscope.

> Which forces are acting on the spinning gyro in the ISS?
>
> --
> Paul
>
> https://paulba.no/

Den 28.11.2023 20:53, skrev patdolan:
> On Tuesday, November 28, 2023 at 2:38:09 AM UTC-8, Paul B. Andersen wrote:
>> Den 27.11.2023 20:50, skrev patdolan:
>>
>>> Wrong, professor Paul. The ISS gyroscope WILL precess. But only once per orbit. Just like a long, heavy pendulum.

>> OK, I will give you a challenge.
>>
>> The ISS will always face the same side towards the Earth,
>> so it is rotating once per orbit.
>>
>> A gyro (or some object) is spinning in the ISS.
>> At some time, the spin axis is perpendicular to ISS' velocity
>> in the ECI-frame, and parallel to the surface of the Earth.
>> (Or in any other _well defined direction_, if you prefer.)
>>
>> The challenge is to describe the motion of the spin axis
>> as the ISS orbits the Earth once.
>>
>> Why do you call this motion "precession"?

> You are right. This is not precession. It is, as Mitch might put it, space-brace. Precession involves an applied torque which does not happen in the ISS example.

>>
>> Second challenge:
>> A long heavy pendulum is hanging under the ISS.
>> A stable situation is that the pendulum is always
>> pointing towards the centre of the Earth.
>>
>> Which forces are acting on the pendulum mass?

> Neither the sun's gravitational field nor the earth's gravitational field exerts a force on the pendulum you discribe. Because the pendulum is in free fall around both. Only Mach's mysterious trans-universe space-brace field acts on the pendulum and the ISS gyroscope.

According to Newton:

The gravitational force on any object with mass m is
always GMm/r² pointing towards the centre of the Earth.
If the object is free falling, the gravitational
(coordinate) acceleration will be GM/r², pointing
towards the centre of the Earth.

The CG of ISS + pendulum is moving in circular orbit,
which means that the acceleration is perpendicular to
the velocity, so the acceleration ω²⋅r₀ is the centripetal
acceleration which make the ISS move in circular orbit.
The centripetal acceleration is equal to the gravitational
acceleration:
ω²⋅r₀ = GM/r₀² (1)
where ω is the angular velocity off the ISS, and r₀ is the
distance from the CG of ISS+pendulum to the centre of the Earth.

Equation (1) say that an object with angular velocity ω
must have a distance from the centre of the Earth:
r₀ = ∛(GM/ω²) to make the centripetal acceleration equal
to the gravitational acceleration.

The pendulum mass m is not free falling because:

Its distance to the centre of the Earth is:
r₁ = r₀-L where L is the length of the pendulum.
So r₁ < r₀, but the angular velocity of m is the same ω,
and r₁ < ∛(GM/ω²), which means that:
ω²⋅r₁ < GM/r₁² (2)
The centripetal acceleration is smaller than the gravitational
acceleration, so the force the string is acting on
the pendulum mass is F₁ = m⋅(GM/r₁²-ω²⋅r₁)

---

An interesting point is that you could have a pendulum
on the other side of th ISS, pointing outwards from the
centre of the Earth.
The force the string is acting on the mass m is:
F₂ = m⋅(ω²⋅r₂-GM/r₂²)

F₁ and F₂ are called tidal forces.
(It's a tidal bulge on both sides of the Earth)
--
Paul

https://paulba.no/