On May 8, 6:21 am, "El Enrrabadore-mor"
wrote:
"Darwin123" escreveu na ...


I guess we agree after all.
It doesn't sound like that to me. I was suggesting that you don't
understand Newtonian physics, and should study it more carefully. Your
comments seem to reinforce my hypothesis.

I've been claiming for Years that nobody ever fully explained
the top/gyroscope by means of Classic Mechanics, including
in this thread. (relativity not even has a clue).
This is not true. The precession of spinning objects is fully
explained both in Newtonian and relativistic physics. It is you who
don't know the necessary physics involved. It seems to me that you
haven't even tried.

All bodies in the Universe are seen to spin.
Nobody ever pointed one that isn't.
All them are top/gyroscopes. Nevertheless...
...the knowledge of how these spinning objects is understood on
a practical level. Technicians, engineers, and scientist launch probes
from a spinning object (the earth), and predict the trajectories with
pin point accuracy. Gyroscopes are used on everything from submarines
to wheel chairs. They seldom break down, because engineers can model
the forces on these gyroscopes. Nevertheless, you somehow claim that
no one understands the top-gyroscope.

The truth is that I've been loosing faith on Physics.
...and the process is exponential.
Ignorance is a bless.
Than you have plenty of bless (i.e., bliss).
I'd like to be ignorant again, back to time I loved
to read about relativity.
However, without any mathematics, right? And without studying
forces, right?
You were not really reading about relativity.