Foucault Pendulum

  • 66 Replies
  • 14320 Views
?

jdoe

  • 388
  • +0/-0
Foucault Pendulum
« on: November 09, 2007, 05:51:13 PM »
How do you explain the Foucault Pendulum?  Its period of precession is 24 hours at the poles and increases as latitude decreases.  There is no precession at the equator.
Mars or Bust

?

Loard Z

  • 4680
  • +0/-0
  • Insert witty intellectual phrase here...
Re: Foucault Pendulum
« Reply #1 on: November 09, 2007, 06:01:04 PM »
it's clearly human error. Did you run your error factors?

Do you know what they are?
if i remember, austria is an old, dis-used name for what is now Germany.
See My Greatness

?

jdoe

  • 388
  • +0/-0
Re: Foucault Pendulum
« Reply #2 on: November 09, 2007, 06:14:54 PM »
Have you ever seen one in person?  They are in museums and observatories all over the world.  As a very large pendulum swings back and forth, its plane of oscillation appears to rotate.  How long it takes to rotate depends on latitude.  At the north pole, it takes 24 hours for the plane of oscillation to make complete revolution.  This amount of time for a complete revolution increases as one approaches the equator, where the pendulum has no rotation at all.  The Griffith Observatory in California has one.  Its period is 42 hours, way beyond measurement errors.
Mars or Bust

*

TheEngineer

  • Planar Moderator
  • 15483
  • +0/-0
  • GPS does not require satellites.
Re: Foucault Pendulum
« Reply #3 on: November 09, 2007, 06:17:51 PM »
ASU has one.  I've watched it for about 3 minutes at a time, waiting for the damn pendulum to knock over a golf tee.  Then I wanted to kill myself.


"I haven't been wrong since 1961, when I thought I made a mistake."
        -- Bob Hudson

?

Loard Z

  • 4680
  • +0/-0
  • Insert witty intellectual phrase here...
Re: Foucault Pendulum
« Reply #4 on: November 09, 2007, 06:20:32 PM »
Have you ever seen one in person?  They are in museums and observatories all over the world.  As a very large pendulum swings back and forth, its plane of oscillation appears to rotate.  How long it takes to rotate depends on latitude.  At the north pole, it takes 24 hours for the plane of oscillation to make complete revolution.  This amount of time for a complete revolution increases as one approaches the equator, where the pendulum has no rotation at all.  The Griffith Observatory in California has one.  Its period is 42 hours, way beyond measurement errors.

Obviously the wobble of the Earth's plane accounts for such matters.
if i remember, austria is an old, dis-used name for what is now Germany.
See My Greatness

?

Mystified

  • 101
  • +0/-0
Re: Foucault Pendulum
« Reply #5 on: November 09, 2007, 09:25:32 PM »
It has been brought to my attention that some may find my post offensive. That is not my intent, I am simply a man of science and enjoy these theories and ideas. I do not discount the possibilities and I don't mean to sound as if I do, I am only stating my findings and would enjoy discussing what the other possibilities are - especially since I have learned some things on this forum I would never have thought to speculate about before.

I've edited this up a bit to do my best to be cordial. Thanks for reading and I hope someone would still like to share some more detailed theories or just ideas on this.

Obviously the wobble of the Earth's plane accounts for such matters.

Actually... I'm not so sure. I had never thought of this approach before, but no amount of wobble on a flat plane would account for the pendulums behavioral similarities at the poles (or even near them, as one cannot get beyond the Ice Wall in reference to the Flat Earth).

If you consider it... the errors would increase the further "south" you got past the equator if there were any actual "wobble" as you say to the flat planed earth (even if it were slightly domed - which would make the result even more dramatic)

Basically, on a flat model, with a pendulum set up on it, and you tried a nice even 'wobble' or some sort of 'lilted rotation' - the further from center you got, the wilder it would get.

OR - if the Earth was just ever so slightly domed and you had a smooth, horizontal rotation, then the pendulum would work exactly as on a Round Earth, but simply keep slowing down as you went towards the edges.

No matter how you slice it - the pendulum does not work on a flat / domed plane according to basic theory.

I found it interesting enough to bring a couple of my colleagues in on it, and please feel free to counter because I would be very interested to hear your input - I've already seen some very good explanations to things I thought otherwise here that hold out in some areas.

I have found no law of physics; standard, quantum, theoretical, or arbitrary, that would allow for any other conclusion.

In earnest exploration for both sides, one of my colleagues did suggest that according to quantum theory, it's possible the pendulum could be responding to another of it's exact mirror in a parallel or mirror "Earth" or plane as it were, therefore causing a reversal once beyond the equator. Although this cannot be tested for or proven, it would require that all pendulums ever made or that ever will be made would have these properties, and since gyroscopes working on the same principle also have the same end results anywhere on the globe (entirely different animal yes, but same principle) it is highly improbable. Impossible? No, but I personally don't think so - that's just my opinion.

Please, I would love to hear more peoples thoughts about this idea!!! Fantastic point and worth the debate! :)
« Last Edit: November 09, 2007, 10:32:01 PM by Mystified »

*

Moon squirter

  • 1405
  • +0/-0
  • Ding dong!
Re: Foucault Pendulum
« Reply #6 on: November 10, 2007, 12:08:00 AM »
It has been brought to my attention that some may find my post offensive. That is not my intent, I am simply a man of science and enjoy these theories and ideas. I do not discount the possibilities and I don't mean to sound as if I do, I am only stating my findings and would enjoy discussing what the other possibilities are - especially since I have learned some things on this forum I would never have thought to speculate about before.

I've edited this up a bit to do my best to be cordial.
..
..

This is where FE theory keels over and dies.  They (theEngineer, username, etc) seem to ignore it or deny this observation is happening. 

I cannot think of any known physical phenomenon that would account for the pendulum's behavior, other than a curved earth.

Username / theEngineer:  Please respond.

I haven't performed it and I've never claimed to. I've have trouble being in two places at the same time.

*

TheEngineer

  • Planar Moderator
  • 15483
  • +0/-0
  • GPS does not require satellites.
Re: Foucault Pendulum
« Reply #7 on: November 10, 2007, 07:29:29 AM »
Conspiracy, obviously.


"I haven't been wrong since 1961, when I thought I made a mistake."
        -- Bob Hudson

*

divito the truthist

  • The Elder Ones
  • 6903
  • +0/-0
  • Relativist, Existentialist, Nihilist
Re: Foucault Pendulum
« Reply #8 on: November 10, 2007, 07:58:49 AM »
I cannot think of any known physical phenomenon that would account for the pendulum's behavior, other than a curved earth.

As stated, nothing is known. Without personal observation of different results around the world, it's harder to speculate as to a reason.
Our existentialist, relativist, nihilist, determinist, fascist, eugenicist moderator hath returned.
Quote from: Fortuna
objectively good

?

Mystified

  • 101
  • +0/-0
Re: Foucault Pendulum
« Reply #9 on: November 10, 2007, 09:27:12 AM »
Conspiracy, obviously.

While I can respect your idea of a massive conspiracy, as I also believe in a few myself (namely technology pasts, etc.) I find conspiracy rather difficult on this subject since it can be personally observed by anyone, anywhere, anytime. Including yourself if you so choose. You can even build a simple model of your own if you had the ambition to do so - even several renditions to make sure if you liked.

So I was just proposing if anyone had any other ideas as to how it might work according to a flat earth rather than just a conspiracy theory.

In this instance - I have to say I find conspiracy theory unsupported since it is such a simple experiment reproducible by anyone with even a basic ability of constructing a simple apparatus.

Do you have any other postulations though? I have seen you post many other in depth ideas on other subjects.

*

Username

  • Administrator
  • 18043
  • +11/-9
Re: Foucault Pendulum
« Reply #10 on: November 10, 2007, 09:30:08 AM »
Well, the ones in museums, etc like you state are all powered by electromagnets. I'm not 100% convinced they are not there to produce results that are not actual.
"Once again the apostles of science are found to lack the scientific credentials for their faith. This not an indictment of science; it only shows again that the choice of science over other forms of life is not a scientific choice."

*

Dioptimus Drime

  • 4531
  • +0/-0
  • Meep.
Re: Foucault Pendulum
« Reply #11 on: November 10, 2007, 09:31:44 AM »
I think Engineer's just fucking with you...


In any case, the point is that the foucault pendulum hardly proves anything. It's just a pendulum. Any number of things could cause it to change its path slightly. The results, therefore, are bogus.

~D-Draw

?

Mystified

  • 101
  • +0/-0
Re: Foucault Pendulum
« Reply #12 on: November 10, 2007, 10:01:21 AM »
Hmmm... well I'm not sure about the data itself being bogus. Pendulums are very simple devices that have been used by people for various purposes for - well - hundreds if not thousands of years. Mainly measurements of time, space, and geometry (like old fashioned protractors used to build buildings, survey properties, etc.). Heck even think about gyroscopic compasses used at sea and in the air to this day that do not use magnets. They use the same basic principles.

Although I can readily agree with you that museums and large public displays COULD be setup ... I find it unlikely that if you setup 3 of these of different, yet  similar design next to one another (say 10 ft. apart), and got the same results, it would be difficult to claim random similarity. Not to mention being able to consistently reproduce these results time and again.

I've been trying out the three I built here in the last couple of days and am fascinated how similar the results are. If you compensate for the differences in size and weight of the pendulums, length of suspension string, therefore length of swing or 'sway' they all work out identical. It's really interesting! Well - to a science goob anyway, overall it's like watching paint dry, but the results in the end are fascinating. :)


*

Username

  • Administrator
  • 18043
  • +11/-9
Re: Foucault Pendulum
« Reply #13 on: November 10, 2007, 10:19:59 AM »
I tried creating one once, but my results were less than satisfactory.  I probably screwed something up.
"Once again the apostles of science are found to lack the scientific credentials for their faith. This not an indictment of science; it only shows again that the choice of science over other forms of life is not a scientific choice."

?

jdoe

  • 388
  • +0/-0
Re: Foucault Pendulum
« Reply #14 on: November 10, 2007, 02:23:48 PM »
Foucault pendulums are indeed difficult to make.  The trick is to reduce friction and air resistance as much as possible so the pendulum can make thousands of swings per day.  That is why such large pendulums bobs are used.   With such large inertias, they are hard to slow down.  Also, the joint connecting the pendulum to the ceiling must be well-lubricated and free to rotate.  It is necessary to give the pendulum a push every few days or so.  Some museums use electromagnets to accomplish this, but keep in mind that Foucault pendulums have been around since 1851, way before such electromagnetic technology was available, and the pendulum had to be pushed by hand.

It is hard to denounce the Foucault Pendulum as a mere conspiracy.  Anyone with a large building and sufficient machining skills could create one and observe the results in various locations across the world. 

Nor can the precession of the pendulum be described as being caused by aberrations caused by a number of effects.  As long as the construction of the pendulum is sound, the observations are far too regular to be ignored.  In fact, here is a mathematical formula relating the the time it takes for the the pendulum to make one complete revolution, T(in hours), and the latitude where the pendulum is located, L(in degrees).

T = 24/sin(L)

Observations fit this equation very well, and as one can calculate, the period of revolution is 24 hours at the poles and increases steadily as one approaches the equator, where the period is infinite i.e. the pendulum does not rotate at all.

A good theory is one that can explain experiments as simply and cleanly as possible without exception, and this is an experiment that deserves a full explanation in Flat-Earth Theory.
Mars or Bust

*

Jack

  • Administrator
  • 5179
  • +0/-0
Re: Foucault Pendulum
« Reply #15 on: November 10, 2007, 02:44:25 PM »





?

Mystified

  • 101
  • +0/-0
Re: Foucault Pendulum
« Reply #16 on: November 10, 2007, 02:53:20 PM »
Also, you can make one relatively easy by using a nice flat weight like a small lifting wieght (say 1-5lb) suspended with a large flange via piano wire and hang it from a ceiling or rafter in home or shop. (Thus keeping wind and elements from the equation). Then being careful to release it and mark it's center points, you would have to check it every 10 min or so and make sure it keeps momentum up. Pain in the butt, but for cheap and practical it works fine.

The largest one I made yesterday is in an old grain silo, and it will swing on it's own for nearly 30 min. I used a ball bearing pulley with rotator cuff at the top, and arc-welded a tap-screw pot to hold the wire on the pulley so it free swings, and rotates freely without any outside influence. A lot of fun to make and try out. Took me a few tries to get a nice even swing... That's when I tried the flat-weight for the pendulum ball via suggestion from a south-pole pendulum site. Definitely works wonders for alleviating any lateral sway or twisting upon release. I used a 10-lb disc weight for the bob.

Again, not for everyone - but I enjoyed making it and seeing it work. And thanks for the equation - I've yet to have my pendulum make a full revolution. Too many things pulling me away from it to watch it for more than a few hours at the most, but I still have visible and viable data which is just downright amazing when you get to see the fruit of your efforts!

Take care,
John

?

Conspiracy Mastermind

  • 1836
  • +0/-0
  • There is no conspiracy...
Re: Foucault Pendulum
« Reply #17 on: November 10, 2007, 03:01:24 PM »
I'd imagine the foucalt pendulum is easily explained by the new antimoon which circles under the flat earth.
Quote from: Tomcooper84
there is no optical light, there is just light and theres no other type of light unless you start talkling about energy saving lightbulbs compared to other types of light bulbs
ENaG: Evidence Not a Guarantee.

*

Username

  • Administrator
  • 18043
  • +11/-9
Re: Foucault Pendulum
« Reply #18 on: November 10, 2007, 04:52:39 PM »
I'd imagine the foucalt pendulum is easily explained by the new antimoon which circles under the flat earth.
Interesting point
"Once again the apostles of science are found to lack the scientific credentials for their faith. This not an indictment of science; it only shows again that the choice of science over other forms of life is not a scientific choice."

?

Mystified

  • 101
  • +0/-0
Re: Foucault Pendulum
« Reply #19 on: November 10, 2007, 04:58:11 PM »
I agree, that is an interesting point (in jest or no I realize). Although I hadn't seen it mentioned other than a few places in the forum, a secondary gravitational force is a possibility. I'll bring it up Sunday afternoon with my friends and see what we come up with! Great!


?

Loard Z

  • 4680
  • +0/-0
  • Insert witty intellectual phrase here...
Re: Foucault Pendulum
« Reply #20 on: November 10, 2007, 06:20:19 PM »
the maths governing a pendulum swing are immensely complicated. I did a project on it in 3rd year.
if i remember, austria is an old, dis-used name for what is now Germany.
See My Greatness

*

Username

  • Administrator
  • 18043
  • +11/-9
Re: Foucault Pendulum
« Reply #21 on: November 10, 2007, 06:47:46 PM »
No, I guess that would only explain paraconical pendulum.

However, it is possible that the earth does spin, which explains the behavior of Foucault Pendulum in the inner disk.  It is possible that the outer disk is swayed, as I said by magnets, human error or some other effect we don't know of yet.
"Once again the apostles of science are found to lack the scientific credentials for their faith. This not an indictment of science; it only shows again that the choice of science over other forms of life is not a scientific choice."

?

eric bloedow

Re: Foucault Pendulum
« Reply #22 on: November 10, 2007, 08:32:27 PM »
and what weird name would you call this NEW mysterious force? darker energy?

?

Mystified

  • 101
  • +0/-0
Re: Foucault Pendulum
« Reply #23 on: November 10, 2007, 11:58:38 PM »
One of my friends suggested a magnetic break at the flat earths equatorial boundary. I'm trying to find equations that will help me to figure out this possibility... perhaps someone on here is already well versed in magnetic fields? I'm more of the radio man and although I readily understand the concepts - I'm not an expert with sheer magnetics at this level.

Dealing with the earth as a flat or mostly flat disc, with some measure of depth, consider that the "inner disc" (which I am referring from the equator to the center) has it's own magnetic field caused by various reasons... layers of iron and magma withing the earths core layers.

Once beyond the equator the "outer disc" might have it's own inverse magnetic field caused by any number of geological differences in the core layers.

Now then, if this worked out correctly - you actually could have a gravitational effect of magnitude in opposing direction. This would also help explain reversal of draining water, etc.

In closing, as I said, I am no expert in raw magnetic fields so I'd be interested to know what anyone else thinks of this theory or might be able to put any stock into it. It was presented to me and sounded like an interesting idea.

In my own extrapolation... what if the flat earth were laid out like a magnet engine? (opposing N-S fields surrounding a N inner disc) The field would end up being somewhat unified on such a large scale and therefore other than the already present "oddity" magnetic areas of the earth, it might actually fit the bill.

C-me!
John

?

jdoe

  • 388
  • +0/-0
Re: Foucault Pendulum
« Reply #24 on: November 11, 2007, 01:12:21 AM »
Of course using the earth's magnetic field to explain the Foucault Pendulum is a difficulty.  Anyone with a compass can see that the magnetic field of the earth is uniform, terminating at the magnetic north pole.  Secondly, magnetism only acts on objects that are made of magnetic materials, carrying an electric current, or electrically charged.  It cannot produce gravitational effects. Gravitation and electromagnetism are distinct fundamental forces in nature that have no known relation to each other.  And if one still tried to explain the motions of the Foucault Pendulum using magnetism, one could just make a bob out of wood!
Mars or Bust

*

Username

  • Administrator
  • 18043
  • +11/-9
Re: Foucault Pendulum
« Reply #25 on: November 11, 2007, 01:15:20 AM »
I mean, every museum and professionally set up foucalt pendulum that i know of uses magnets to "push" the pendulum
"Once again the apostles of science are found to lack the scientific credentials for their faith. This not an indictment of science; it only shows again that the choice of science over other forms of life is not a scientific choice."

?

jdoe

  • 388
  • +0/-0
Re: Foucault Pendulum
« Reply #26 on: November 11, 2007, 01:31:08 AM »
As was explained earlier, some modern Foucault Pendulums have magnetic devices to give them a little push to counteract slowing down due to friction.  However, it is entirely possible to to create a simple Foucault Pendulum that does not use a magnetic device and still observe the same results with amazing regularity.  This has been done for hundreds of years ever since the first Foucault Pendulum was displayed in 1851.
Mars or Bust

?

Mystified

  • 101
  • +0/-0
Re: Foucault Pendulum
« Reply #27 on: November 11, 2007, 01:33:03 AM »
Yes, I had thought of the wooden / plastic bob problem beforehand... what is interesting to note in this instance though is that there are several places on our planet where a magnetic compass goes berserk (aside from the poles). Therefore there ARE anomalies in the magnetic field, thus there could be a correlation to the FE theory. Magnetism can cancel itself out with varying amounts of localized forces. Again you possibly have a start of a theory.

Since even non-metallic objects are still affected by the earths magnetic field as a force (even in our RE model - rotation isn't the only thing keeping our atmosphere from dissipating, nor radiation from turning us into crispy critters. :) ) then it is still something to take a look at. If nothing else, just for the fun of it. I'm not saying I buy it, but hey... anything is possible until proven otherwise right?

Just a fun idea to throw around. And where did you get the idea that Gravitation and Magnetism are unrelated?

If you'd like some reference materials on relationships between gravitation, magnetism, and even electricity, I have some links here somewhere. Or you can just google it I'm sure.

Take care,
John
 

?

Conspiracy Mastermind

  • 1836
  • +0/-0
  • There is no conspiracy...
Re: Foucault Pendulum
« Reply #28 on: November 11, 2007, 01:37:53 AM »
Oh, please call it the antimoon! Please!!
Quote from: Tomcooper84
there is no optical light, there is just light and theres no other type of light unless you start talkling about energy saving lightbulbs compared to other types of light bulbs
ENaG: Evidence Not a Guarantee.

?

jdoe

  • 388
  • +0/-0
Re: Foucault Pendulum
« Reply #29 on: November 11, 2007, 01:58:41 AM »
Electricity and magnetism are well known to be intimately related, hence the term electromagnetism.  James Clerk Maxwell unified the two in the late 1800s.   What was meant when it was said that gravity and electromagnetism are distinct is that they depend on separate physical quantities, mass and charge.  An object only feels an electromagnetic force if it has an electric charge, and an object only feels a gravitational force if it has mass.  The converse is true as well, only a mass can produce a gravitational force, and only an electric charge can produce a electromagnetic force.  Thus, gravity and electromagnetism are fundamentally different.
Mars or Bust