[ 3 / biz / cgl / ck / diy / fa / ic / jp / lit / sci / vr / vt ] [ index / top / reports ] [ become a patron ] [ status ]
2023-11: Warosu is now out of extended maintenance.

/sci/ - Science & Math

View post   
File: 3.74 MB, 2208x1242, 1DE7EF31-25E8-4704-9D80-B948053B05DC.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
9878233 No.9878233 [Reply] [Original]

WHAT THE FUCK EXPLAIN THIS /SCI/?

>> No.9878249

Those things are complicated. Matrices and Euler-Lagrange math type complicated.

>> No.9878250

Hitler was right

>> No.9878253

>>9878233
precession

>> No.9878281

>>9878249
What

>> No.9878306

>>9878281
I said:
>[Gyroscopes] are complicated.
>[Gyroscope mechanics involves Euler-Lagrange (calculus of variations) math, as well as matrices]
desu it's been a while since I studied them tho, so I could be wrong but I don't think so.

>> No.9878315

>>9878250
Kek!
To sum it up in 14 words:
We must secure the force lever arm so the precession occurs at right angles.

>> No.9878348

>>9878233
>dick ready to go in a nearby vag
>Roman salute
okay, I see what's going on

>> No.9878612

>>9878306
I haven't tried it, but shouldn't it be somewhat trivial to construct a normal Lagrangian with only three independent variables? I don't think matrices would be necessary.

Then again, looking at it on paper it's certainly harder than the Coriolis force.

>> No.9878629

>>9878233
Lrn2angular-momentum fgt pls

>> No.9878646

>>9878612
I probably should have said tensors instead of matrices if you wanna get technical (although so far I'm only finding 2x2 ones which is surprising you'd think they'd be 3x3 for 3 dimensions). Anyway, there are definitely systems of coupled differential eqns you need to solve. Just google gyroscope lagrangian if you want to see what some really hardcore physics looks like.

>> No.9878655

>>9878646
Yeah I figured it would only be 2x not 3x since you've got that conservation of momentum there to cancel shit out. To be honest it's not that awful looking, the worst part is just dealing with the polar nature of the equation.

>> No.9878661

>>9878655
>To be honest it's not that awful looking
Ok, then. Carry on.

>> No.9878663

>>9878306
>>9878612
>>9878646
why would you introduce theoreical mechanics if rotational momentum was explicitly reduced to 0
in this situation the torque is [math] \tau = F * r = mg r [/math]
if there was some angular velocity then yeah lagrangian mechanics would be ideal

>> No.9878668

>>9878663
The assumption is that OP was referring to the situation where the gyroscope is spinning, since the case where it is not is trivial, regardless of what his image has written across it.

>> No.9878676

>>9878655
>To be honest it's not that awful looking
You seem pretty good at this stuff so read this:
http://www.mate.tue.nl/mate/pdfs/9731.pdf