[Niki4To]

This is the video we will discus about:



The photos explaining the experiment can be seen here:

https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/1WU5fCbuoc6n9YHVHFu9zhey8Ch0chBcv

Images are showing how the inclination after 17 minutes haven't changed at ALL(I showed with blue lines the lenses distortion for the ones who think the gyroscope starts spinning inclined since the beginning. Anyway, the change in inclination matters and there is no change in the inclination)(the gyroscope should have not problem to stay inclined because it is a gyroscope. But it is not inclining...).

This, plus this pendulum:



...is proving to me that the earth is planar and it rotates in a way like shown in this GIF:

https://giphy.com/gifs/earth-Lj74pzXm6TQ08/fullscreen

This experiment should give the most clear results at the equator. And this experiment does not require people to travel. Because it is about degrees, sayings like "Earth is too big to notice it" are not valid.

Please, if you think I am wrong, feel free to disprove my proposal. I want proofs and want to find the truth.

[ICanScienceThat]

This is the video we will discus about:



The photos explaining the experiment can be seen here:

https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/1WU5fCbuoc6n9YHVHFu9zhey8Ch0chBcv

Images are showing how the inclination after 17 minutes haven't changed at ALL(I showed with blue lines the lenses distortion for the ones who think the gyroscope starts spinning inclined since the beginning. Anyway, the change in inclination matters and there is no change in the inclination)(the gyroscope should have not problem to stay inclined because it is a gyroscope. But it is not inclining...).

This, plus this pendulum:



...is proving to me that the earth is planar and it rotates in a way like shown in this GIF:

https://giphy.com/gifs/earth-Lj74pzXm6TQ08/fullscreen

This experiment should give the most clear results at the equator. And this experiment does not require people to travel. Because it is about degrees, sayings like "Earth is too big to notice it" are not valid.

Please, if you think I am wrong, feel free to disprove my proposal. I want proofs and want to find the truth.

An interesting and unique take... I have never heard of and FE model that rotates. Amazing.

The Foucault pendulum question... try the same pendulum in different parts of the world. If the world is flat and rotating as you suggest, then all pendulums should rotate in the same direction at the same rate. Is this true or not? Research the answer to that and get back to us.

The spinning top question... This one is very interesting. If this test was done at the equator, we would expect have experienced 4 degrees of rotation around the horizontal axis during this video. What would that look like? As it turns out, this is not an easy question to answer. If we simply tilted the plate, the top would stay upright, but we didn't do that... we tilted the gravity vector too. What would that do to a spinning top? The answer is pretty complex. Graduate-level physics complex. Let's think about it in the context of our understanding of tops.

If you start a top at a very tiny incline (not perfectly straight up and down), what does it do? Look at @0:05... the guy places the top down by hand, so it won't be perfectly aligned. Take a screenshot and see if you can estimate about what angle he drops it at. What we have here is an example of how a top responds to a slight misalignment between the gravity vector and its upright.
a) The first thing I notice is that it starts moving in circles.
b) The next thing I notice is that it quickly rights itself.
c) As we continue to watch, we see that the circles gradually decrease, and the vertical alignment of the top gradually straightens.
This is all consistent with my own experience with tops. From this, what can we say for certain? Well, we aren't sure of the physics behind it, but we have observed that a spinning top will right itself if the angle is tilted. Let's apply that to a rotating gravity field and see what we think should happen...
When the gravity field rotates, the top will get out of alignment. This is precisely analogous to when the guy dropped it in the beginning. We would expect the top to start going in a little circle while it rights itself. Is that what we saw?
How much does the gravity field rotate? 4 degrees over the course of 16 minutes. The gravity field is rotating slow and steady, so any adjustments the top makes are also slow and steady.
So to sum it up, what we see with this experiment is consistent with what we probably should expect. Tops DO right themselves. If they didn't, kids would never be able to make them work. The physics is certainly not obvious nor trivial, but tops work. This we know for sure.

[Niki4To]

In the beginning of this video, we can see a stable tilted gyroscope that is not straightening with time. I guess, because the uploader of the first video is interested in proving as long spin as he can, he took various shoots until he managed to almost perfectly balance the gyroscope.

I have to agree, playing as a child with tops, they have to some extent self correcting/straightening capabilities. This could be due to the shape of the base which displaces with the inclination.

If we simply tilted the plate, the top would stay upright, but we didn't do that...

Exactly this is what should happen with the tilting of the earth.

If somebody can afford a more expensive gyroscope like this:



Such gyroscope could prove the pendulum movement too.

Because as you see in the video, if the Earth is a rotating plane, this gyroscope should detect it.
This multiple axes gyroscope, just can not "stay still" on an Earth that rotates in any way. I invite anybody who has access to a precise few axes gyroscope to make it run as long as possible and see if it detects some Earth rotation.

[Curious Squirrel]

You mean like this? https://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2011-12/tum-fed122211.php

Similar things going on here: http://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/1742-6596/723/1/012061 Although this looks more like a preliminary paper than one discussing something that was actually done. But I also glossed over a fair bit of it.

[Niki4To]

You mean like this? https://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2011-12/tum-fed122211.php

Similar things going on here: http://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/1742-6596/723/1/012061 Although this looks more like a preliminary paper than one discussing something that was actually done. But I also glossed over a fair bit of it.

Thank you for the black holes....

I try to propose a way, any person can make a test at home. Or at least at the university. You are pointing me to something based on faith. Because "lasers in a ring" is nothing practical for any normal person. It is about faith. I should believe scientists black holes exist. I can not prove them myself, only faith is left for me.

In my personal opinion, this is what frustrates most of people. They are given sci-fi kind of speeches, talking about infinite dimensions, and we are all almost forced to believe in infinite dimensions, but people see flat water surfaces on earth and this is "wrong", regard scientists...

"Disbelieve the simple, believe in string theory!"
"Disbelieve your own eyes, believe in my unreadable formulas!"
"Disbelieve logic! We don't have the technology to get to the moon in a nanosecond anymore."

[ICanScienceThat]

You mean like this? https://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2011-12/tum-fed122211.php

Similar things going on here: http://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/1742-6596/723/1/012061 Although this looks more like a preliminary paper than one discussing something that was actually done. But I also glossed over a fair bit of it.

Thank you for the black holes....

I try to propose a way, any person can make a test at home. Or at least at the university. You are pointing me to something based on faith. Because "lasers in a ring" is nothing practical for any normal person. It is about faith. I should believe scientists black holes exist. I can not prove them myself, only faith is left for me.

In my personal opinion, this is what frustrates most of people. They are given sci-fi kind of speeches, talking about infinite dimensions, and we are all almost forced to believe in infinite dimensions, but people see flat water surfaces on earth and this is "wrong", regard scientists...

"Disbelieve the simple, believe in string theory!"
"Disbelieve your own eyes, believe in my unreadable formulas!"
"Disbelieve logic! We don't have the technology to get to the moon in a nanosecond anymore."

The Foucault pendulum can be done at home, and it often is. Start with that. Coming up with a gyroscope capable of detecting that rate of turn will be hard for us do-it-at-home types.

[Curious Squirrel]

You mean like this? https://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2011-12/tum-fed122211.php

Similar things going on here: http://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/1742-6596/723/1/012061 Although this looks more like a preliminary paper than one discussing something that was actually done. But I also glossed over a fair bit of it.

Thank you for the black holes....

I try to propose a way, any person can make a test at home. Or at least at the university. You are pointing me to something based on faith. Because "lasers in a ring" is nothing practical for any normal person. It is about faith. I should believe scientists black holes exist. I can not prove them myself, only faith is left for me.

In my personal opinion, this is what frustrates most of people. They are given sci-fi kind of speeches, talking about infinite dimensions, and we are all almost forced to believe in infinite dimensions, but people see flat water surfaces on earth and this is "wrong", regard scientists...

"Disbelieve the simple, believe in string theory!"
"Disbelieve your own eyes, believe in my unreadable formulas!"
"Disbelieve logic! We don't have the technology to get to the moon in a nanosecond anymore."

You were asking about high quality (expensive) gyroscopes. Presuming I owned one, why would me posting a write up like this on it be any different than what I've linked? You can buy Ring Laser Gyroscopes, but they aren't cheap, if you wanted to test one yourself. They do appear to be a key component in many aircraft though too.

[ICanScienceThat]

In the beginning of this video, we can see a stable tilted gyroscope that is not straightening with time. I guess, because the uploader of the first video is interested in proving as long spin as he can, he took various shoots until he managed to almost perfectly balance the gyroscope.

I have to agree, playing as a child with tops, they have to some extent self correcting/straightening capabilities. This could be due to the shape of the base which displaces with the inclination.

If we simply tilted the plate, the top would stay upright, but we didn't do that...

Exactly this is what should happen with the tilting of the earth.

If somebody can afford a more expensive gyroscope like this:



Such gyroscope could prove the pendulum movement too.

Because as you see in the video, if the Earth is a rotating plane, this gyroscope should detect it.
This multiple axes gyroscope, just can not "stay still" on an Earth that rotates in any way. I invite anybody who has access to a precise few axes gyroscope to make it run as long as possible and see if it detects some Earth rotation.

On the other board, I have this little thread:
https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=76641.0
It hasn't gotten much attention because it's not controversial at all.
But it is extremely relevant to this topic here. If you have an experiment which fails to detect the rotation of the Earth, you must ask, "What is the minimum amount of rotation this experiment CAN show?" Do that first before any proof is declared.

[Niki4To]

I wasn't talking about 20K gyroscopes. Any gyroscope with few axes should detect the Earth rotating.

There are smaller versions of the gyroscope in the last video for ~60$ in internet. They are not spinning for long although. 5mins at most. I could think of attaching some motor to them.

If lasers detect movements, this should detect movements too. Lasers are just supposedly much more precise. We don't need precision, because for 24h, the cheap setup should move visibly enough toward some direction, if the Earth is spinning.

I have seen people spending a loooooot more to test the FE theory. I don't see how suddenly money is a problem for a cheap setup.

[Tom Bishop]

You mean like this? https://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2011-12/tum-fed122211.php

Actually, that experiment is measuring the earth's "wobble". The device is attached to the earth deep underground and a stabilized laser is pointing at it, measuring how much the earth vibrates in relation to the laser.

See: https://physicsworld.com/a/laser-gyroscope-measures-the-earths-wobble/

[ICanScienceThat]

If lasers detect movements, this should detect movements too. Lasers are just supposedly much more precise. We don't need precision, because for 24h, the cheap setup should move visibly enough toward some direction, if the Earth is spinning.

You need precision enough to show the effect. You need to test your setup to see how precise it is.
https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=76641.0

Should be pretty simple to test. Just put the gyro on a turntable like the video shows. Then setup the turntable with a little motor (and some reducing gears)  to rotate it slowly. Test it rotating at various speeds making sure to include the range you're searching for (1/1440th rpm). If your gyro can clearly show the effect when the table is rotating down at speeds slower than 1/1440th rpm, then you have a worthy experiment.

[Niki4To]

But I am not leaving the system at any moment. Zeroing the experiment with the turntable is still being affected by the rotation of the globe Earth. And I can not tell for sure in which direction is everything rotating. Because Earth is spinning around itself, around the sun, around the galaxy, around the origin of the universe.... maybe....   It is like trying to nullify a gyroscope while riding on a roller coaster.

I think the sole fact of being able to make the gyroscope stay still is a proof the Earth is not rotating.

(BTW, I don't think a plane Earth is neutralizing the concept of gravity. Even if being a plane, the Earth is still a huge solid body and generates gravity force because of its mass. I don't think we need to almost invent things like "density" in order to defend FE theory. Gravity still works on a plane Earth)

BTW2 - A gyroscope only deals with rotation. Not a lineal movement. And now that I think of it, it doesn't necessarily prove flat Earth either. It just proves Earth is not rotating. Maybe earth is a still globe and the universe is rotating around the earth. A pretty expensive idea. It's cheaper for the Creator of the universe to project the celestial bodies onto a dome.

[ICanScienceThat]

But I am not leaving the system at any moment. Zeroing the experiment with the turntable is still being affected by the rotation of the globe Earth. And I can not tell for sure in which direction is everything rotating. Because Earth is spinning around itself, around the sun, around the galaxy, around the origin of the universe.... maybe....   It is like trying to nullify a gyroscope while riding on a roller coaster.

Do the test on the rotating turntable and establish that it is capable of showing something. Do this in both directions to counter out the component from the Earth' natural rotation. If your gyro is sensitive enough to show the effect of the Earth turning, this will easily be demonstrated by trying it on a rotating turn-table. If your gyro simply isn't sensitive enough, your turntable will show that too. It's possible that the Earth's rotation PLUS the turntable is just enough to register something. Therefore, you want to try this in both directions to be certain.

I think the sole fact of being able to make the gyroscope stay still is a proof the Earth is not rotating.

I must strongly disagree. You must prove that the gyroscope would do something different whether or not the Earth were rotating. Let me give you a stupid example. When I jump up and down, the lamp in my room shakes. It does this because I am heavy. If I bounce a tennis ball, the lamp does not shake. Therefore the tennis ball weighs nothing! Proofed! ... or maybe not... maybe my lamp shaking test isn't sensitive enough for that.

(BTW, I don't think a plane Earth is neutralizing the concept of gravity. Even if being a plane, the Earth is still a huge solid body and generates gravity force because of its mass. I don't think we need to almost invent things like "density" in order to defend FE theory. Gravity still works on a plane Earth)

There are serious problems with gravity and the FE. That's why gravity is considered a non-starter to FE believers.
1) Gravity would pull the Earth into a spherical shape.
2) A disk-shaped Earth would have bizarre gravity that is not uniformly down. Out at the edges of the disk it would point almost entirely inward.

BTW2 - A gyroscope only deals with rotation. Not a lineal movement. And now that I think of it, it doesn't necessarily prove flat Earth either. It just proves Earth is not rotating. Maybe earth is a still globe and the universe is rotating around the earth. A pretty expensive idea. It's cheaper for the Creator of the universe to project the celestial bodies onto a dome.

The gyroscope idea is worthwhile, but so far, you have proven nothing. If you can prove that the Earth is not spinning, that would rock the world. But try it, and I guarantee you'll learn something.

[Niki4To]

The gyroscope idea is worthwhile, but so far, you have proven nothing. If you can prove that the Earth is not spinning, that would rock the world. But try it, and I guarantee you'll learn something.

I can not "rock the world". I lack the marketing to "rock the world".

I will let people with followers in youtube, and people who are part of FE clubs do the tests. Somebody with bigger media impact.
If anybody is interested in further working on the gyroscope tests, of course.

I'm leaving for now.