gravity waves found

[Harvey]

to all replicators and experimentalists....take a piece of 3/8 copper tube and bend it into a 11" circle and solder the ends together...spin the device and hold the ring at equator and slowly pull upward ...you should see a film like a bubble...kindof?..like a funnel or vortex...please try this, its cheap ....let me know what you see and feel......if you have seen the glimmer, you have got to see this...bruce,you are getting sleepy... ...try this ....it is too cool....david

Hi David, just want to get this straight in my head:

Use approximately 34.5 inch length of 3/8 copper tubing and bend into a ring having an 11" diameter. Solder the ends together to make an airtight bond.

Rotate the Lambright Replication Rig in the horizontal plane and hold the ring side by side with the rig, also in the horizontal plane at a vertical elevation equal to the equator of the rig. Now, slowly lift the ring upwards while keeping it horizontal and view the space in the middle of the ring and report the findings.

Do I have it right?

[david lambright]

copper ring around device

put the ring around the device, at the equator, then slowly pull the ring up...from the copper to the device you will see a "filmy" glimmer....and also feel the other anomalies.....david

[Cloxxki]

David, are the anolomies and glimmer absent when you break the magnetic lock of your device and/or the ring? I think such a control experiment is always vital.
Thanks!

Sure sound like something that can be measured relatively simply. Let a weak little motor winch the ring up and monitor rpms in each case.

[david lambright]

sucahyo

do you have a link to garys stuff?....david......and i will wait to hear back from other replicators......thanks...david

[solrey]

Personally, I'm not going to accept the rolling shutter theory until some proof is shown to support it.

One thing that I feel disproves the shutter theory is that the parallax does not follow the camera when the camera is rotated, but instead stays with the object and even with different angles at that. I have yet to find (and I have been doing a rather intensive search) anything on the net that resembles this in any of the known photographic or digital aberrations.

I am fully open to data and proof to the contrary

Here ya go.

Harvey. The skew in all of the suspected rolling shutter artifact images is always in the same orientation within the frame regardless of the orientation of the frame in relation to Davids rig. Squished on the left side and elongated on the right side in every image.

Image of rotating fan blades taken with a global shutter, no skew.


Image of same fan taken with a rolling shutter. Squished on the left, elongated on the right. Much like Davids images.


Images came from here.

Compare with these two images of Davids rig taken from two different angles. The skew remains in the same orientation in relation to the frame, not the rig. Squished on the left, elongated on the right.



Here's the explanation from the digital imaging expert on TB forum:

The distortion in this image, is an artifact of it having been taken with a digital camera.

In most modern CMOS image sensors, the rows of the image are not all exposed synchronously. Rather these sensors have an "electronic rolling shutter" architecture, in which the rows are exposed sequentially from top to bottom (or bottom to top) as the image is read out from the sensor. This is a bit of an oversimplification, but nevertheless the effect is similar to what would happen if you exposed a piece of old-fashioned photographic film by sliding a horizontal slit from the top of the frame to the bottom.

In your picture:

The wheel segments at the top of the image, are moving from left to right, as rows are being exposed from top to bottom. The effect is that the segments appear to be skewed leaning to the left;

The segments at the bottom are moving from right to left, and so appear skewed in the opposite direction;

The segments on the right are moving downwards, as rows are being sequentially exposed one after another from top to bottom, so these segments appear elongated vertically;

Correspondingly, the segments on the left are moving upwards while being scanned from top to bottom, and appear shortened vertically.

I think If you took a video of any other rotating object with this camera, you'd see the same effects.

Hope that's enough evidence for ya Harvey. All David has to do is what was suggested above, take a pic of any other rotating object, like a fan, with the same camera and put the issue to rest once and for all.

Even this latest copper ring experiment is the same tactic of "take my word for it" without any supporting measurements or experimental controls. Personal anecdotes is not scientific proof. If Davids rig were even weakly magnetized then that copper ring should respond accordingly and if that's the case there's nothing new or mysterious about that.

[Harvey]

Here ya go.

Harvey. The skew in all of the suspected rolling shutter artifact images is always in the same orientation within the frame regardless of the orientation of the frame in relation to Davids rig. Squished on the left side and elongated on the right side in every image.

Image of rotating fan blades taken with a global shutter, no skew.


Image of same fan taken with a rolling shutter. Squished on the left, elongated on the right. Much like Davids images.


Images came from here.

Compare with these two images of Davids rig taken from two different angles. The skew remains in the same orientation in relation to the frame, not the rig. Squished on the left, elongated on the right.



Here's the explanation from the digital imaging expert on TB forum:



Hope that's enough evidence for ya Harvey. All David has to do is what was suggested above, take a pic of any other rotating object, like a fan, with the same camera and put the issue to rest once and for all.

Even this latest copper ring experiment is the same tactic of "take my word for it" without any supporting measurements or experimental controls. Personal anecdotes is not scientific proof. If Davids rig were even weakly magnetized then that copper ring should respond accordingly and if that's the case there's nothing new or mysterious about that.

I have seen these.

However, it does not explain the effect that David demonstrated in his video. If the rolling shutter was the cause, then the contraction would have stayed in the left side of the picture when the camera was rotated 90° - but instead, the contraction stayed with the object.

How do you explain that the contraction remained constant with the object and did not follow the camera?

[FuzzyTomCat]

Hi all,

Well I'm totally done in this thread .... I've offered several times to showcase David's device and his discovery on my "LIVE" 24/7 broadcasting channel Open Source Research and Development and let the four corners of the Earth see and comment on his findings for any period of time needed .... 1 hour to days "LIVE".

I have received "no" reply's to my offer and request.

Good "Luck" David with your project !!

Regards,
Glen

[solrey]

David. Along with being critical, I, and others, have also tried to be helpful by offering suggestions on various ways of testing that would help eliminate "false positives" in the evidence, such as not being able to rule out the rolling shutter distortion without a control comparison. Some of those tests could even possibly provide proof such as a weight hanging from a spring scale suspended over the rig, or a plumbob suspended next to it, or that simple balance scale someone took their time to diagram for ya.
Here's another idea for testing. A magnetic field viewer. Here's a video on making one.

Instead of responding to these suggestions, you just rant at me/others over how we don't believe and are trying to discredit you. That's why I said you're acting like an immature bully by ranting, as opposed to actually accepting those ideas with a positive attitude and answering legitimate questions about your supporting theories.

I think I'm closer to 50 miles away, btw. I told ya before it's at least a three hour round trip to get there and back and spend some quality time testing and talking. I'd even have a tasty Oregon micro-brew or two with ya. However, I have a lot on my plate so I don't really need the extra burden right now. I'll probably be going to Portland sometime in the next two or three months so I could arrange to stop by on the way but a special trip is just too inconvenient at this point.

For those that scoff at education, how do you know that what's being taught is wrong if you never bothered to learn it in the first place? How can a valid comparison be made in that case? Funny thing is, I agree that a lot of what's taught is wrong. But to say that everything that's taught is wrong is as silly as saying that everything taught is right. Reality resides somewhere between those extremes. The primary difference is that those of us who took the time to learn it anyways understand what's probably right, what's likely wrong and why.

[solrey]

Harvey. Which video are you talking about? Could you provide a link please, there have been quite a few videos.

Where the object is located in the frame in relation to center would make a difference in where the distortion is centered on the object, btw. Weren't the video's and still shots taken with different cameras anyway?

Thanks in advance for the link.

[david lambright]

fuzzy

i am sorry about not getting back to you sooner, let me say first i tried to borrow the same camera that took both the video and still shots with...no luck...about the offer, with all of whats being said about this being normal and all...i just would hate to waste your time and resources...do not get me wrong, i would love to get my device live...also my device #1 is ugly, unbalanced, and has these hokey 2 by 4s on it ...it looks like crap...it works well enough, but i would like to get #3 built first....i dont blame you for withdrawing your offer....i know that what i see is new and the copper ring, i think if other replicators can get this effect also, it would be better than me trying to do expirements...just yet anyways.....so you can withdraw your offer i will understand....but if you could wait just a bit ...i would love to take your offer.....and again i am sorry.....david

[Harvey]

Harvey. Which video are you talking about? Could you provide a link please, there have been quite a few videos.

Where the object is located in the frame in relation to center would make a difference in where the distortion is centered on the object, btw. Weren't the video's and still shots taken with different cameras anyway?

Thanks in advance for the link.

YouTube - mikes house #3


From what I can see, the contraction remains in the vicinity of the Long Board which is clearly rotated 90° between nine seconds and 23 seconds.

It is unfortunate that we don't have a good 360° walk around (which I have asked for repeatedly) to confirm in a more demonstrable way that this effect remains with the device and not the camera.


Zoom Image


Zoom Image

Zoom Image

[Harvey]

Hi all,

Well I'm totally done in this thread .... I've offered several times to showcase David's device and his discovery on my "LIVE" 24/7 broadcasting channel Open Source Research and Development and let the four corners of the Earth see and comment on his findings for any period of time needed .... 1 hour to days "LIVE".

I have received "no" reply's to my offer and request.

Good "Luck" David with your project !!

Regards,
Glen

David,

Glen would be a very good asset to your cause and will give unbiased exposure to your effect for everyone to benefit from. Also, I think he may be nearly as close as Solrey. Perhaps both of them could evaluate the rig together with you to give a true balanced view. You as the PRO, Solrey as the CON and Glen as the neutral arbitrator

Let's take a vote: Who would like to see this?
1. I would

[IndianaBoys]

David,

Let's take a vote: Who would like to see this?
1. I would

Good idea Harvey.

FuzzyTomCat, thanks for offering to do this.

David, thanks for being persistent on your direction!

IndianaBoys vote YES

[thekubiaks]

Rolling shutter

Harvey,
Thanks for the rolling shutter pictures. I think you hit the nail on the head.

[CatLady]

Yes!

Good idea Harvey.

FuzzyTomCat, thanks for offering to do this.

David, thanks for being persistent on your direction!

IndianaBoys vote YES

This will be so cool to watch. Get your next rig made up as soon as you can David. This is what open source is all about.

CatLady vote YES


Cat