Bob Knodel and the laser ring gyroscope

The OP was:

Bob Knodel is a famous (?) Youtube flat earther who tried an experiment to prove the earth was fixed - non rotating. He obtained a UD$20,000 laser ring gyroscope, an extremely accurate device, to show that the earth was not spinning. The gyroscope registered a 15 degree per hour drift.

Does this prove a rotating earth? Or like Bob Knodel said, did it measure the "heavenly energies"?

If the gyroscope did measure a 15 degree per hour rotating earth, can this be possible still with a flat earth and local sun-moon circling system?

So this post on Quora.com might be of interest: What is the reaction of flat Earthers to the documentary "Behind the Curve"? It might indicate what others outside this little place think.

It is worth noting that, not only was there Bob Knodel's admission but:

when Jeran Campanella (of jeranism) tried to prove lack of curvature over a body of water by shining light through large panels with holes cut in them. Wouldn’t you know it, his test proved curvature, and as the cameras were rolling, all he could say was “Interesting”. Later he denied the results.

Wouldn’t you know it, his test proved curvature, and as the cameras were rolling, all he could say was “Interesting”. Later he denied the results."

Yes, two very “Interesting” admissions from "at the top" flat earthers.

Then we have "Rob Skiba Proves Globe" and a bit of "No I didn't!" and "Yes, you did!:

Flat Earth: Rob Skiba Proves Globe by Sly Sparkane

Rob Skiba Proves Globe - DEBUNKED byRob Skiba

Flat Earth: Rob Skiba Proves Globe b by Sly Sparkane

But it does seem to be that some of these YouTube flat earthers are starting to do experiments more carefully and are not liking their answers.
And all Bob Knodel could say was “It would be bad”, "What I've just told you is confidential" and Jeran Campanella simply says “Interesting” and later he denied the results.

That is incorrect and has nothing to do with, "According to the official RE equations of orbital mechanics."

Are you actually saying that the RE equations of orbital mechanics DO NOT predict that the vernal equinox for the year 325 AD fell on March 21?

You have 23 hours to modify your statement.

Otherwise, you are claiming that you are a flat earth believer.

If you made an error, and now you realize that actually those equations MUST PREDICT that the vernal equinox fell on March 21, in the year 325 AD, then you have a huge problem.

Not only does Gauss' Easter formula directly contradict this statement, but also you have to deal with another fact.

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1935048#msg1935048

Woooo sando.
So many words.
What exactly is your point here?
I thought the aether was because scientists at the time didnt think space was empty.
What does that have to do with flatness of earth?

Here's the 'interesting' clip Rab referenced:

Could I be excused for thinking that the YouTube "flat er'fers" are not happy with Jeran and Bob Knodel for "proving" the earth a rotating Globe?

JERANISM AND GLOBEBUSTERS Kicked Out of FE After Being BUSTED Part 2 - Dmarblez Love affair by UNIRock2
And I'm sure there's more to follow.  Poor poor Jeran and Bob Knodel don't you feel sorry for them ?

Good advice. Don't get a conspiritard riled up or they'll a invent CIA conspiracy against you - and no flat er'fer wants that!

The word it out about the Bob Knodel/Jeranism debacle:

Has the ROMU Ring laser facility that precisely measures Earth’s rotation convinced any Flat Earthers that the theory is wrong? If not, why not?

Answer #3:
No. In a recent documentary some flat earthers spent $20.000 to buy a super-accurate gyroscope, and discovered that in fact, the measurement they got proved that the earth was rotating, exactly as much as the heliocentric model says.

Their reaction? That they had try to some other way to prove that the earth doesn’t rotate, because that way didn’t work.

No arguments can convince them, because flat earthery is not a science, it’s a mental problem.

My real question with this, which really challenges my beliefs about FEers, were they actually stupid enough to think it wouldn't happen?
I had always assumed these guys new their claims were BS and were just conning people (and that dishonesty is plainly visible in some videos).
Was he hoping the gyroscope wasn't accurate enough to measure the drift, or did he actually believe his nonsense of Earth allegedly not rotating?

My real question with this, which really challenges my beliefs about FEers, were they actually stupid enough to think it wouldn't happen?
I had always assumed these guys new their claims were BS and were just conning people (and that dishonesty is plainly visible in some videos).
Was he hoping the gyroscope wasn't accurate enough to measure the drift, or did he actually believe his nonsense of Earth allegedly not rotating?

They probably, saw all those "toy" mechanical gyroscopes supposedly proving a stationary Earth so thought they would prove it once and for all.
Comments and debunks of those YouTube video told them what was wrong but being typical flat earthers "they knew better".

But now that Rob Skiba, Jeran Campanella and Bob Knodel are starting to good experiments and not liking the results as they go against their "TRUTH".

Of course Jeran Campanella is loathe to lose the few thousand a month he pockets from YouTube.
I wonder what happen after his demonstration of "curved water" and Bob Knodel et al's gyroscope fiasco.

Other flat-earthers are decidedly unhappy.

But at least they are doing these experiments. No flat earther on this site or TFES.org seem prepared to take part in the simplest.
Even the "Modified Eratosthenes Experiment" seems too much bother so just come up with the usual arguments against the original one.

but still doesn't answer the question as to why sando is so adamant taht the earth is stationary floating in aether?
Wasn't the MM experiment done because they didn't know space was actually mostly empty space (scepti's 2cents not necessary)?
so what's the deal?!
what does MM have to do with flatness?

but still doesn't answer the question as to why sando is so adamant taht the earth is stationary floating in aether?
Wasn't the MM experiment done because they didn't know space was actually mostly empty space (scepti's 2cents not necessary)?
so what's the deal?!
what does MM have to do with flatness?

Re: The Michelson-Gale-Pearson Experiment « Reply #3 on: February 24, 2019, 08:52:22 AM »
Have you ever seen me address the fact that the fringe shifts recorded by Michelson and Gale had significant periodic variations? Certainly not.

Why?

Because the RE would then claim that those variations were due to any number of causes (temperature); what matters is that virtually of all of the FE/GE have accepted Michelson's claim that the formula published by him is the SAGNAC EFFECT formula, which it is not.

Once the claim regarding the SAGNAC EFFECT is accepted, there is nothing else that the FE/GE can do: they have to accept that the average readings of the fringe shifts do indeed satisfy the formula published by Michelson.

You cannot invoke the e/m device at the edge of the Earth: you are forgetting the HAMMAR EXPERIMENT; an arm of the interferometer was encased in lead and no fringe shifts at all were recorded. Then, the RE claimed that there is no aether displacement as well.

Always remember that the MGX and the HX work in tandem.

'Nuff said but when did that stop me ?
The luminiferous aether was accepted as the medium necessary for light propagation till well after 1900.
But some observations seemed to demand that this aether be dragged along by solid material and some didn't.
And James Bradley threw a spanner in the works with his explanation of Stellar Aberration.

Aberration of Light
Aberration is historically significant because of its role in the development of the theories of light, electromagnetism and, ultimately, the theory of special relativity. It was first observed in the late 1600s by astronomers searching for stellar parallax in order to confirm the heliocentric model of the Solar System.
However, it was not understood at the time to be a different phenomenon. In 1727, James Bradley provided a classical explanation for it in terms of the finite speed of light relative to the motion of the Earth in its orbit around the Sun, which he used to make one of the earliest measurements of the speed of light.
However, Bradley's theory was incompatible with 19th century theories of light, and aberration became a major motivation for the aether drag theories of Augustin Fresnel (in 1818) and G. G. Stokes (in 1845), and for Hendrik Lorentz's aether theory of electromagnetism in 1892.

I attempted to present the aether options and refute them in Flat Earth Debate / Re: VERY SIMPLE QUESTION for HC believers!!! « on March 01, 2018, 11:29:16 AM »

More gobblygook.
Still doesnt answer the question.

More gobblygook.
Still doesnt answer the question.

So you want the short version to

but still doesn't answer the question as to why sando is so adamant that the earth is stationary floating in aether?
Wasn't the MM experiment done because they didn't know space was actually mostly empty space (scepti's 2cents not necessary)?
so what's the deal?!
what does MM have to do with flatness?

Nothing!

---

But I should add that Sandokhan is mainly arguing against the Michelson-Gale-Pearson Experiment being really the Sagnac effect and he claims that it does not measure rotation.

He admits that:

Re: The Michelson-Gale-Pearson Experiment « Reply #3 on: February 24, 2019, 08:52:22 AM »
Once the claim regarding the SAGNAC EFFECT is accepted, there is nothing else that the FE/GE can do: they have to accept that the average readings of the fringe shifts do indeed satisfy the formula published by Michelson.

So as far as sandokhan, Flat Earth Sultan and Flat Earth Scientist is concerned, accepting that the laser ring gyroscope does measure the earth's rotation kills the idea of a flat stationary earth stone dead.

It's that important and Bob Knodel et al have now admitted that.

Thanks



Sando!
Wheres the sando answer?
Come on.

This is the experimental data published by Michelson and Gale in 1925:



http://articles.adsabs.harvard.edu/cgi-bin/nph-iarticle_query?1925ApJ....61..140M&data_type=PDF_HIGH&whole_paper=YES&type=PRINTER&filetype=.pdf (page 145, page 6 of the pdf document)

For the FE who do not believe in aether theory, this data can be used immediately to claim that the Earth is stationary.

This is because there were fringe shift observations which showed NO CHANGE IN THE LIGHT'S VELOCITY, which proves that the interferometer is STATIONARY, and is not subject to any kind of a rotational motion.

There would be no need to enter into further discussions regarding the Coriolis effect, the Sagnac effect, or aether theory.

The fringe shifts show directly NO ROTATION OF THE EARTH AT ALL.

Any kind of an argument raised by the RE (temperature, equipment used, anything else) can be turned against them as well.

This is the main reason why Michelson inserted this observation data on page 6 (in the acknowledgments section), away from the main discussion, in order to attract as little attention to it as possible.

On page 144 (page 5 of the pdf document) Michelson states:

In view of the difficulty of the observations, this must be taken to mean that the observed and calculated shifts agree within the limits of observational error.

However, several observations showed that the Earth is not rotating.

So, for the FE who do not want to get involved in debates regarding the aether, the Hammar experiment, all they have to do is use the data published by Michelson to indicate/prove that the Earth is stationary (no fringe shifts recorded at all in several cases).

Wasn't the MM experiment done because they didn't know space was actually mostly empty space?
so what's the deal?!
what does MM have to do with flatness?

MMX = SGX (same formula, proven by E.J. Post in 1999); all comments pertaining to the SGX apply immediately to the MMX as well

Aether theory = flat earth theory (pressure gravity instead of attractive gravity; pressure gravity is possible on a flat surface of the Earth)

Hoek/Mascart experiments:

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1956136#msg1956136

Whole lot of words...

Ezecutive summary on why a stationary earth = flat earth

This is the experimental data published by Michelson and Gale in 1925:

Hey you're back.
I see you still haven't managed to figure out what is wrong with your derivation yet, nor the simple derivation for a ring.

For the FE who do not believe in aether theory, this data can be used immediately to claim that the Earth is stationary.

No it can't.
It is clear that there is a roughly normally distributed result clearly centred away from 0, with some significant error.
The closest you could get (with any semblance of honesty) is claiming there is too much error to determine if Earth is stationary.
But plenty far more accurate measurements, such as the one performed by Bob Knodel, clearly shows rotation without any possibility of dismissing it as error.

This is the main reason why Michelson inserted this observation data on page 6

He stuck it there because that is where it fits.
If he didn't want to attract attention to it, why include it at all?
Why draw attention to it by stating "The entire set of two hundred and sixty-nine determinations and their distribution about the mean value is shown graphically in Figure 3."?

Your reasoning makes no sense at all.

Aether theory = flat earth theory (pressure gravity

Aether does not mean flat Earth, not does it mean pressure gravity, nor does FE mean pressure gravity, nor does pressure gravity mean FE.

Thanks



Sando!
Wheres the sando answer?
Come on.

Come on be fair, you have to give him time for the laxative to do its work.

The closest you could get (with any semblance of honesty) is claiming there is too much error to determine if Earth is stationary.

Exactly the point of my previous message: the RE now have to deal with the fact that a few of the readings DO INDEED prove that the Earth is stationary.

You cannot claim too much error: any argument brought in the debate, whatever it is (temperature, equipment), can be turned immediately against the RE.

You have to deal with the fact that the readings, several of them, showed NO ROTATION AT ALL.

So, as far as the MGX goes, if the FE do not want to get involved in very long debates, all they have to do is point out that the MGX registered several readings with no rotation at all.

However, the RE will now bring the RING LASER GYROSCOPES into play, both terrestrial and used in airplanes, with a much higher degree of accuracy, to claim the Earth is rotating. Seismic waves, Earth's line fluctuations can be explained by the RE, so that eventually the FE will need my formula to claim victory.


There is nothing wrong with my formula: it is splendidly correct.

A second reference which confirms my global/generalized Sagnac effect formula.

https://apps.dtic.mil/dtic/tr/fulltext/u2/a206219.pdf

Studies of phase-conjugate optical devices concepts

US OF NAVAL RESEARCH, Physics Division

Dr. P. Yeh
PhD, Caltech, Nonlinear Optics
Principal Scientist of the Optics Department at Rockwell International Science Center
Professor, UCSB
"Engineer of the Year," at Rockwell Science Center
Leonardo da Vinci Award in 1985
Fellow of the Optical Society of America, the Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers



page 152 of the pdf document, section Recent Advances in Photorefractive Nonlinear Optics page 4

The MPPC acts like a normal mirror and Sagnac interferometry is obtained.



Phase-Conjugate Multimode Fiber Gyro

Published in the Journal of Optics Letters, vol. 12, page 1023, 1987

page 69 of the pdf document, page 1 of the article


A second confirmation of the fact that my formula is correct.

Here is the first confirmation:



Self-pumped phase-conjugate fiber-optic gyro, I. McMichael, P. Yeh, Optics Letters 11(10):686-8 · November 1986 

http://www.dtic.mil/dtic/tr/fulltext/u2/a170203.pdf (appendix 5.1)


Exactly the formula obtained by Professor Yeh:

φ = -2(φ₂ - φ₁) = 4π(R₁L₁ + R₂L₂)Ω/λc = 4π(V₁L₁ + V₂L₂)/λc

Since Δφ = 2πc/λ x Δt, Δt = 2(R₁L₁ + R₂L₂)Ω/c² = 2(V₁L₁ + V₂L₂)/c²

CORRECT SAGNAC FORMULA:

2(V₁L₁ + V₂L₂)/c²

The very same formula obtained for a Sagnac interferometer which features two different lengths and two different velocities.

http://www.dtic.mil/dtic/tr/fulltext/u2/a170203.pdf

ANNUAL TECHNICAL REPORT PREPARED FOR THE US OF NAVAL RESEARCH.

Page 18 of the pdf document, Section 3.0 Progress:

Our first objective was to demonstrate that the phase-conjugate fiberoptic gyro (PCFOG) described in Section 2.3 is sensitive to rotation. This phase shift plays an important role in the detection of the Sagnac phase shift due to rotation.

Page 38 of the pdf document, page 6 of Appendix 3.1


it does demonstrate the measurement of the Sagnac phase shift Eq. (3)


HERE IS EQUATION (3) OF THE PAPER, PAGE 3 OF APPENDIX 3.1:

φ = -2(φ₂ - φ₁) = 4π(R₁L₁ + R₂L₂)Ω/λc = 4π(V₁L₁ + V₂L₂)/λc

Since Δφ = 2πc/λ x Δt, Δt = 2(R₁L₁ + R₂L₂)Ω/c² = 2(V₁L₁ + V₂L₂)/c²

CORRECT SAGNAC FORMULA:

2(V₁L₁ + V₂L₂)/c²

Exactly the point of my previous message: the RE now have to deal with the fact that a few of the readings DO INDEED prove that the Earth is stationary.

Then you clearly do not understand English.
That is the opposite of what I said.
Those results DO NOT prove Earth is stationary.
There strongly indicate (most people would say prove) Earth is rotating.
The only hope you have is to pretend the error is to great and say it can't tell.
That wouldn't mean Earth is stationary. It would just mean the results have too great an error to determine if Earth is stationary or rotating.
But all sane people would clearly see that it shows Earth is rotating.

So, as far as the MGX goes, if the FE do not want to get involved in very long debates, all they have to do is point out that the MGX registered several readings with no rotation at all.

You mean all they have to do is lie through their teeth by completely ignoring loads of results.
Also, you don't seem to be able to count. There was 1 reading which showed no rotation.

eventually the FE will need my formula to claim victory.

You mean to lie some more, embarrass themselves and pretend to have victory.
Again, your formula makes no sense.
When you are meant to be finding a total time, you are instead finding a difference which doesn't correspond to any physical thing in the setup.
It makes no sense at all.
This has been pointed out and explained repeatedly, but you just ignore it and continue to assert the same BS.

You have a formula, which can be applied to a symmetrical system which should show no phase shift at all, yet which predicts a phase shift, showing another massive problem with it.

You completely avoid very simple questions to expose this problems.


No copying and pasting loads of stuff you clearly don't understand.
Start with the basics.
How long does it take light to travel around a stationary loop?
Once you have figured out that we can then put the loop in motion to do more complex things.

This is the experimental data published by Michelson and Gale in 1925:



http://articles.adsabs.harvard.edu/cgi-bin/nph-iarticle_query?1925ApJ....61..140M&data_type=PDF_HIGH&whole_paper=YES&type=PRINTER&filetype=.pdf (page 145, page 6 of the pdf document)

For the FE who do not believe in aether theory, this data can be used immediately to claim that the Earth is stationary.

This is because there were fringe shift observations which showed NO CHANGE IN THE LIGHT'S VELOCITY, which proves that the interferometer is STATIONARY, and is not subject to any kind of a rotational motion.

There would be no need to enter into further discussions regarding the Coriolis effect, the Sagnac effect, or aether theory.

The fringe shifts show directly NO ROTATION OF THE EARTH AT ALL.

And how do you work out that 0.230 fringes is "NO ROTATION OF THE EARTH AT ALL".


But why do you only try to refute the Michelson-Gale-Pearson results when far more accurate modern similar devices are installed in various places.
One of these is the GINGERino deep underground ring-laser installed in Italy which is able to measure the rate of the earth's rotation very accurately.

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
"GINGERino, a deep underground ring-laser" is installed in Italy and is able to measure the rate of the earth's rotation very accurately.
See First Results of GINGERino, a deep underground ring-laser

And note that it starts with:

Quote

1. Introduction
Ring laser gyroscopes (RLG) are, at present, the most precise sensors of absolute angular velocity for an Earth based apparatus. They are based on the Sagnac effect arising from a rigidly rotating ring laser cavity.

The resolution is quite impressive.

Quote

The Gross Ring ”G” at the Wettzell Geodetic Observatory has obtained a resolution on the Earth rotation rate of 3 × 10⁻⁹ (about 15 × 10⁻¹⁴ rad/s with 4 hours integration time).

That paper did not give the rotation rate, just the stability etc.
But this paper does: Ring-Lasers seismic rotational sensing, Angela Di Virgilio-INFN-Pisa

And the result is:

Quote

Earth Rot. Rate (7.2921150±0.0000001)×10⁻⁵ radians/sec

which is  guess what  a period of 23.93447 hours and the currently quoted sidereal day is 23.9345 hours - the GINGER result is more precise than that.

The GINGERino deep underground ring-laser proves that the earth rotates on its axis at (7.2921150±0.0000001)×10⁻⁵ radians/sec.
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Uuuuugh

Sando

In plain english
1-2 sentences.
So what if the earth is stationary?!

This is the experimental data published by Michelson and Gale in 1925:

You really can't get any more relevant data? Why do you insist working with 100 years old data and theories when there are more up to date data available. To show how outdated you are?

Getting back the "Bob Knodel and the laser ring gyroscope" some might say of this little squabble among the YouTube flat earthers "That's interesting . . "

Conference between #TheRealGlobebusters #TEAMYAHAWASHI #FlatEarth Behind The Curve Star Bob Knodel of Globebusters EXPOSED... 2019 NETFLIX The Limitless Channel

There was revolt at the flat earth station,
for the word had passed around,
that Bob Knodel let the secret get clean away.
He'd wasted that Laser Gyro — it was worth a cold twenty grand.

This thread is a better place for an answer to:

Quote from: AroundWeGo on February 28, 2019, 05:40:03 PM

We have people trying to disprove RE by buying an extremely sensitive gyroscope saying it should move 15 degrees every hour if the Earth is a globe—so giddy to prove once and for all it’s flat.

They see it move 15 degrees every hour and instead of maybe, just maybe, the Earth is round, they say, “oh.....gee.....I don’t know what’s going on.....perhaps some effect we don’t know about and we will create out of thin dome air.”

I would like a link to that experiment, thanks.

This is this official trailer:

Behind the Curve - Official Teaser Trailer

And here are a few "takes" on Bob Knodel's laser gyro experiment but there are numerous more.

The "Rory" version. Rory is a very level headed and polite anti-flat earther:

Bob Knodel vs Gyroscope (Bob loses) by Rory

The "FlatEarth.ws" version. "FlatEarth.ws" is very definitely an anti-flat earth site.

Bob Knodel & His Ring Laser Gyroscope Experiment by FlatEarth.ws

And the "YouTube Flat-Earth Community" is not happy and how!

Bob Knodel of globebusters is a LIAR and a SATANIST and getting THE BOOT Beyond Flat Earth! by Awake Souls

That Laser Gyroscope, costing $20,000, that got Bob Knodel into so much bother was just a little "portable" one.

But, as Crocodile Dundee might have said:
That's not a Laser Gyroscope, 


this is a Laser Gyroscope!


That GINGERino ring laser gyro has sides of 3.6 m and can measure rotation with a precision of 2 parts in 10⁶ and later ones can achieve 1 part in 10⁸.
Have a look at

High-Accuracy Ring Laser Gyroscopes: Earth Rotation Rate and Relativistic Effects by N Beverini et al
Abstract. The Gross Ring G is a square ring laser gyroscope, built as a monolithic Zerodur structure with 4 m length on all sides. It has demonstrated that a large ring laser provides a sensitivity high enough to measure the rotational rate of the Earth with a high precision of ∆Ω_E < 10^-8.

Of course that one in Italy is hardly the thing you might take home.

FECore apparently has some series leaks in their midst.  There are a couple of videos on Youtube discussing Bob Knodel, FECore, and Globebusters.  In these descriptions for these videos the channel has these links.  They’re email chains and Skype histories that show their attempts to find a way to explain why their gyro shows a drift...not related to earths rotation that is.     

https://cdn.discordapp.com/attachments/543661178858111006/550393458117050395/bobdemise.jpg
https://pastebin.com/tYT0H0XE

On Bob’s channel, Globebuster, Bob had said that they put their FOG in a Helmholtz coil and it showed no drift at all and it “effectively shutdown” the gyro.  From the info in those links it appears the wasn’t completely honest about that.  Additionally, for some reason both of Globebusters channels on Youtube have removed all their content.  I have no idea why.

That Laser Gyroscope, costing $20,000, that got Bob Knodel into so much bother was just a little "portable" one.

But, as Crocodile Dundee might have said:
That's not a Laser Gyroscope, 


this is a Laser Gyroscope!


That GINGERino ring laser gyro has sides of 3.6 m and can measure rotation with a precision of 2 parts in 10⁶ and later ones can achieve 1 part in 10⁸.
Have a look at

Quote

High-Accuracy Ring Laser Gyroscopes: Earth Rotation Rate and Relativistic Effects by N Beverini et al
Abstract. The Gross Ring G is a square ring laser gyroscope, built as a monolithic Zerodur structure with 4 m length on all sides. It has demonstrated that a large ring laser provides a sensitivity high enough to measure the rotational rate of the Earth with a high precision of ∆Ω_E < 10^-8.

Of course that one in Italy is hardly the thing you might take home.

Unfortunately, some flerf will come up and repeat their cult classic statement of "there is absolutely no scientific measurement of earth's rotation by anyone ever".

And Sandy will come up with reams of copy pasta to show that this is not the Sagnac effect or some such.

But like all things accepted by science, there is either physical experimentation, actual observations or at least cross-checkable mathematics to support said theories or/and accepted facts

FECore apparently has some series leaks in their midst.  There are a couple of videos on Youtube discussing Bob Knodel, FECore, and Globebusters.  In these descriptions for these videos the channel has these links.  They’re email chains and Skype histories that show their attempts to find a way to explain why their gyro shows a drift...not related to earths rotation that is.     

https://cdn.discordapp.com/attachments/543661178858111006/550393458117050395/bobdemise.jpg
https://pastebin.com/tYT0H0XE

On Bob’s channel, Globebuster, Bob had said that they put their FOG in a Helmholtz coil and it showed no drift at all and it “effectively shutdown” the gyro.  From the info in those links it appears the wasn’t completely honest about that.  Additionally, for some reason both of Globebusters channels on Youtube have removed all their content.  I have no idea why.

From what I have read from your link, these guys really believe what they ....preach. They really believe the earth is flat. They have a good idea about scientific processes even though they will outright reject what doesn't confirm their bias, still they have a working knowledge of scientific processes.

How on earth can they still think the earth is flat? Gives more credence to thay ex flat earther interviewed by FightTheFlatEarth who said the flat earth belief is in the heart and not the head. You can use logic and reason against the head but not against the heart.

Do these guys not understand that Pythagoras works in higher dimensions? In so many spots they are trying to just use 2 axes instead of all three.

Does anyone have any information about the ring laser gyroscope tests mentioned in "Behind the Curve" other than the trivial amount shown?

I was concerned about a potential error (way back in the second post of this thread) which I don't think anyone here has yet brought up, so I'm looking for any other info about the experiment itself.

Thanks!

Does anyone have any information about the ring laser gyroscope tests mentioned in "Behind the Curve" other than the trivial amount shown?

I was concerned about a potential error (way back in the second post of this thread) which I don't think anyone here has yet brought up, so I'm looking for any other info about the experiment itself.

Thanks!

Other than their own emails and Skype histories already linked, I don't think you'll find much more.  They've even cleaned out their Youtube channels.  FECore has a website and a Youtube channel but there isn't much more there.

All we know is they got a fiber optic gyro which they were sure would show no drift.  It did and links explains what the did after that.  If you go to their website (liked below) they discuss other gyros they tested and why they decided to build their own.

https://fecore.org/mechanical-gyros-and-testing-earth-spin/

This is a video of their custom built mechanical gyro that they believe will show no drift.



Mike