Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/5/84; site mordor.UUCP Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!gamma!epsilon!zeta!sabre!bellcore!decvax!genrad!mit-eddie!think!harvard!seismo!ut-sally!mordor!@S1-A.ARPA,@MIT-MC.ARPA:BIESEL@RUTGERS.ARPA From: @S1-A.ARPA,@MIT-MC.ARPA:BIESEL@RUTGERS.ARPA Newsgroups: net.space Subject: Rotational Inertia Message-ID: <2557@mordor.UUCP> Date: Mon, 8-Jul-85 14:08:38 EDT Article-I.D.: mordor.2557 Posted: Mon Jul 8 14:08:38 1985 Date-Received: Fri, 12-Jul-85 00:26:28 EDT Sender: daemon@mordor.UUCP Lines: 12 From: BIESEL@RUTGERS.ARPA I've been watching the comments concerning ways to overcome the gyroscopic inertia problem with the OMNIMAX cameras with growing disbelief. The 'fix' seems to consist of a second counterrotating mass whose angular momentum is matched by various means to that of the filmreel. It won't work, of course. Adding a second rotating mass, counterrotating, at right angles, or whatever will simply *ADD* to the problem by creating more angular momentum. You might as well try to 'cancel' some mass by adding some mass in another place; it just doesn't work that way. -------