Ive been accused to fake experimental data and thats false

AI Thread Summary
The discussion centers around an experiment involving a toy gyroscope and its performance under different wind conditions, particularly focusing on precession. The initial findings suggest that winds with precession lasted longer than others, but the rigor of the experiment is questioned. Participants emphasize the importance of calculating error margins to validate results, arguing that without this, the claims lack scientific credibility. There is a debate about whether precession requires power, with some asserting it does not, while others suggest it can be harnessed to power the gyroscope. The conversation also touches on the need for more rigorous experimentation by qualified individuals to explore these findings further. Additionally, there are off-topic remarks about the nature of the discussion and the behavior of participants, indicating a mix of serious inquiry and light-hearted commentary.
capullosois
Messages
7
Reaction score
0
I might not have carried out my experiment very rigorously using a toy gyroscope that lasts 7 minutes.
But in 20 measures the two top lasting winds were the ones that had precession and the rest were showing equal lasting with variations of 30 seconds usually
 
Physics news on Phys.org
So did you calculate what a 30 second variation means? Did you calculate how much current theory says it should change? What, specifically, makes you think there is anything interesting/unusual about this result?

You're making claims here that are extrordinary and such claims require extreme scientific rigor before anyone will give them much more than a passing glance.
 
Last edited:
Then I am suggesting somebody with the capability to be more rigorous carry on this experiment that might have been overlooked.
If the times coincide no calculation is necessary since the point of the experiment is to see if a wind with precession lasts the same than a non precessive wind
 
capullosois said:
If the times coincide no calculation is necessary since the point of the experiment is to see if a wind with precession lasts the same than a non precessive wind
No experiment ever produces exactly the same result every time. Quantifying the error inherrent in the experiment is essential to determining if you have witnessed a valid phenomena. That includes calculating the expected result and determining if the measured result is close (or far) enough to cover such errors.

Also, what makes you think that precession needs to be powered?
 
Last edited:
russ_watters said:
No experiment ever produces exactly the same result every time. Quantifying the error inherrent in the experiment is essential to determining if you have witnessed a valid phenomena. That includes calculating the expected result and determining if the measured result is close (or far) enough to cover such errors.
Just adding to russ' good comment a comment of my own:
In fact, one could say that the distinguishing mark of experimental science IS to specify the "error margin".

If you haven't established a sound error margin, you haven't been doing experimental SCIENCE.
 
Last edited:
I truly believe precession not needing to be powered.But it can be used to power the gyro itself.
The point of my experiment was to check this out and to my amazement the results were the unexpected, precession needs not to be powered is a movement that requires no energy imput
 
I just watched a documental that described how a group of scientists are trying to build a self feeded dynamo, just as the Earth core, that produces the magnetic field which produces electricity fields around the planet that feeds the magnetic field of the Earth and so on in a vicious circle.
And all is done by the Earths melted metal core
 
...try not watching so much TV, and read some Science books instead - it may help you understand more if you do!
 
It's like a car wreck...I can't seem to stop watching for his posts.

Must...resist...
 
  • #10
FredGarvin said:
It's like a car wreck...I can't seem to stop watching for his posts.

Must...resist...
Why resist? It's like the Chuck Barris version of "Where's Ivan?" Take it as the guilty pleasure that it is, the way some idiots watch reality shows. :biggrin:
 
  • #11
Yet another aviator sockpuppet banned.

Keep it up, buddy. It takes us three clicks to ban a user, and four to ban an IP.

.
.
.

and there's a lot more of us than there are of you.
 

Similar threads

Back
Top