free and forced precession of Earth illustrated with a gyroscope 

15 degrees per hour.

Thanks indeed.

Thank you for your comment. You are right, the direction of the arrow does not conform to the conventions. But the only purpose of the arrow is to show that the rotating disc maintains its orientation. This statement is not affected by this.

Yes, I even had to watch this video 3 times in slow motion to confirm ¯\_(:|)_/¯ Also it is probably ambiguous when people say they "apply torque". I guess they apply force (or impulse) on the gimbal, which in its turn MAY create torque. In this video the flywheel can rotate on 3 axes, but there are gyros with only two perpendicular axes and thus one orthogonal axis (and torque direction) is inaccessible.

how are we not able to see moon at the same time if earth were flat

@@liyan4346 why do we speak the same language is english your first language or........, ENGLISH was force upon us......, the video just showed that the base of your globe is flat the base of a gyroscope is flat....flat an ENGLISH word

@Demba Ba misunderstanding bro,my bad

thought you were flat earth believer

@@liyan4346 did you ever hear the earth say I'm the earth I'm a globe ....we can see what the so called earth is and it not a globe

That's exactly what he explained: if the earth was not flat, this would not happen. So, the precession of the earth is another proof, earth is a disk

@@thepirateshoots No he didn't.

​@@thepirateshoots I am afraid you have misunderstood the video. You could replace the thin disc of the gyro with a sphere or any other object and still observe precession. However, the shape of the spinning object will affect its motion because it affects the inertial tensors.

@@apmggroup-unibonn3544 Maybe I could, but Earth is flat anyway! - Thanks for the proove :) 💪

It is definitely not a spinning water ball. Physics of water always seeks it's level. Sea level. Horizon horizontal

The purpose of the gyro in this video is to illustrate the difference between forced and free precession. It is not intended to be an accurate model of the Earth. The luni solar precession does in fact have a period of about 26,000 years (1 degree every 72 years). It is caused by the Sun and Moon, acting on the equatorial bulge. So it is a forced precession. But at 1:10 the gyro is used to illustrate free precession, not forced precession.

do you geocentrists and flat earthers ever fight each other

@@Test-tu9mb We search for truth.

@@LCKRD-un1rx so is that a yes or a no

@@Test-tu9mb I dont. Not sure others.

...снять с натовского самолета...🤣

True

good joke

Precessão com a mesma face voltada para a Terra há milênios 😅😅😅😅

@@celo1390 não estou falando da Precessão do eixo de rotação lunar, estou falando de outra Precessão, a Precessão do plano de orbita lunar, uma coisa não tem nada a ver com a outra.

@@jnswarrior mas deveria, está tudo interligado!!

Ага, просто кьо-то засрал Землю!!!

​@@celo1390 a Precessão da órbita lunar, é algo totalmente ignorado pelos acadêmicos atuais, principalmente a sua relação com clima, espera só pra ver os próximos anos o regaço climático q esta "oscilação da lua" irá fazer, kkkkk, a NASA chama assim.

Não dá para aplicar gravidade, atmosfera, um núcleo quente, campo magnético, tudo que o planeta tem.

Don't be such a fish 🐟

We have had this gyroscope in our institute for a long time. I am afraid I cannot tell you where to get one.

Can you proof this theory?

Better go to primary school

​@@alex99ww Just take a personal video of earth rotating from a helicopter, and you would prove that God, our God given senses, and the court are wrong.

Cara, se um gigante de un 12Km de altura se mover na mesma velocidade que vc ele vai parecer que está em câmera lenta

in your flat EEG

This a joke?

The Earth rotates. You can easily prove this by taking a long time exposure of the night sky. You will see star trails that are caused by the Earth's rotation. Another way to demonstrate the Earth's rotation is to use a Foucault pendulum or a ring laser gyroscope.

@@apmggroup-unibonn3544 Not so! Stars revolve around us look at airys failure, (telescope filled with water experiment) Stars moving does not prove you are. Foucaults pendulum is a myth, all be it a persistent one, any physicist worth their salt agrees that there are way too many variables setting them in motion and that results are far too inconsistent ie travelling in opposite directions etc. large ones in museums requiring attachment of motors etc. Gyroscopes do not precess with a globe in airplanes as they travel thousands of miles Michelson Morley experiment fails to detect any rotation of the earth. Rotational vector mathematics of an object rotating around its axis at 1000mph whilst orbiting a Center of mass at 6700mph is continually accelerating and decelerating up to 2000mph in any 24hr period. That’s a detectable acceleration/deceleration at an average rate of 1.6mph every second. Do the maths for the international space station and it gets even more ridiculous!

@@apmggroup-unibonn3544 nothing adds up on round earth. nothing can be predicted. That's why they have stolen ancients knowledge that mapped stars moon and sun to perfection. Round earthers can do this on round earth maths and science. Like I said nothing ever adds up exactly.

Yeah sure. Would you make a vid for us?

No.

@@MrGasp0de do your research

@Kevin Clark don’t take your aggression out on me because you’re too $tup!d to figure it out. Blame your parents

😄😄😄

Try the ellipsoid --- best of both worlds! 😎💃☝

........the oceans are moving with the earth.... you can't stop something if you are moving with it. that's like trying to stop a car from rolling by standing on the bumper and pushing.

@@Test-tu9mb oceans are moving with the earth in your "head"; in reality the oceans move independently, they are liquid, you headless

@@luigicirelli2583 By this logic I can't hold a cup of water on a plane since the plane is moving too fast and the liquid is "moving independent." Objects maintain momentum. You can't just say they behave a certain way and make it be true.

@@ChickenNuggetManCNM we don't rotate; we're still

@@luigicirelli2583 Why does a gyroscope show rotation then