Foucault's Pendulum

  • 212 Replies
  • 54508 Views
?

ghazwozza

  • 942
  • +0/-0
Re: Foucault's Pendulum
« Reply #150 on: December 14, 2008, 09:52:46 AM »
What evidence do you have for the unobservable and unexperienced?

I've been asking you the same question. What is your evidence for a rotational gravitational pull?

*

Roundy the Truthinessist

  • Flat Earth TheFLAMETHROWER!
  • The Elder Ones
  • 26966
  • +0/-0
  • I'm the boss.
Re: Foucault's Pendulum
« Reply #151 on: December 14, 2008, 10:24:32 AM »
How does the third not require assumption? ???
Because you eliminate all other possibilities...
Not if you start eliminating from the bottom of the list...
If you do that, you must conclude that their is an unknown, unobserved, and undetectable force that distinguishes between pendulums and other objects, causing pendulums to swing as if the earth is rotating.

That is correct.  It distinguishes between a pendulum and other objects for the same reason the rotation of the earth supposedly distinguishes between a pendulum and other objects.
The rotation of the earth does not distinguish between a pendulum and other objects. The pendulum is suspended from a point which it is free to rotate around; if the point is moved, it is unaffected by rotation, because a point has no geometry. The pencil is on the ground and moves with the earth, which is not rapidly accelerating or decelerating.

Precisely my point.  Since the pendulum is swinging freely it is subject to the Coriolis Force.  The pencil on the ground is not.
Where did you educate the biology, in toulet?

?

NTheGreat

  • 1019
  • +0/-0
Re: Foucault's Pendulum
« Reply #152 on: December 14, 2008, 12:23:02 PM »
Quote
People have observed the rotation of the pendulum. There are big museum exhibits where people watch that thing for hours.

But don't we go on and on about how museums use stuff to influence the pendulum?

Perhaps we should go about this a different way. Suppose you were on the pendulum. What would you observe, aside from a lot of going forwards and backwards?

*

Raist

  • The Elder Ones
  • 30499
  • +0/-0
  • The cat in the Matrix
Re: Foucault's Pendulum
« Reply #153 on: December 14, 2008, 12:29:26 PM »
Quote
People have observed the rotation of the pendulum. There are big museum exhibits where people watch that thing for hours.

But don't we go on and on about how museums use stuff to influence the pendulum?

Perhaps we should go about this a different way. Suppose you were on the pendulum. What would you observe, aside from a lot of going forwards and backwards?
Going forward and backwards, and depending on your mindset, the floor rotating under you, or you slowly moving to the left or right. Not a good way to determine cause.

?

ghazwozza

  • 942
  • +0/-0
Re: Foucault's Pendulum
« Reply #154 on: December 14, 2008, 12:34:38 PM »
This argument has gone on 9 pages without consensus. Let's review the arguments:

1) An observer on Earth sees the pendulum rotate. An observer on the pendulum would see the Earth rotate. Other evidence is needed to determine which one is actually rotating.
2) Pendula in museums are powered by a electromagnets to counteract friction. This does not affect the direction in which the pendulum swings.

Are we in agreement so far?

3) RET can account for the apparent motion of the pendulum. FET cannot.
« Last Edit: December 14, 2008, 12:45:23 PM by ghazwozza »

?

NTheGreat

  • 1019
  • +0/-0
Re: Foucault's Pendulum
« Reply #155 on: December 14, 2008, 12:42:11 PM »
Quote
Going forward and backwards, and depending on your mindset, the floor rotating under you, or you slowly moving to the left or right. Not a good way to determine cause.

My point exactly. The pendulum rotating is not more likely than the planet rotating based on that observation alone.

*

Raist

  • The Elder Ones
  • 30499
  • +0/-0
  • The cat in the Matrix
Re: Foucault's Pendulum
« Reply #156 on: December 14, 2008, 01:23:27 PM »
This argument has gone on 9 pages without consensus. Let's review the arguments:

1) An observer on Earth sees the pendulum rotate. An observer on the pendulum would see the Earth rotate. Other evidence is needed to determine which one is actually rotating.
2) Pendula in museums are powered by a electromagnets to counteract friction. This does not affect the direction in which the pendulum swings. This point is completely unknown and would require investigation, magnetic fields pulse, and are round, I would say there could be some underlying force.

Are we in agreement so far?

3) RET can account for the apparent motion of the pendulum. FET cannot.

*

Perfect Circle

  • 734
  • +0/-0
  • You are a pirate!
Re: Foucault's Pendulum
« Reply #157 on: December 14, 2008, 01:41:21 PM »
How does the third not require assumption? ???
Because you eliminate all other possibilities...
Not if you start eliminating from the bottom of the list...
If you do that, you must conclude that their is an unknown, unobserved, and undetectable force that distinguishes between pendulums and other objects, causing pendulums to swing as if the earth is rotating.

That is correct.  It distinguishes between a pendulum and other objects for the same reason the rotation of the earth supposedly distinguishes between a pendulum and other objects.
The rotation of the earth does not distinguish between a pendulum and other objects. The pendulum is suspended from a point which it is free to rotate around; if the point is moved, it is unaffected by rotation, because a point has no geometry. The pencil is on the ground and moves with the earth, which is not rapidly accelerating or decelerating.

Precisely my point.  Since the pendulum is swinging freely it is subject to the Coriolis Force.  The pencil on the ground is not.
Static friction. If you perform this experiment in a vacuum (to negate air resistance on an object with so little mass) with a pencil hanging from the string, you would experience the same effect.
Like the sun, the stars are also expanding and contracting their diameter as they spin around the hub every six months.

*

Roundy the Truthinessist

  • Flat Earth TheFLAMETHROWER!
  • The Elder Ones
  • 26966
  • +0/-0
  • I'm the boss.
Re: Foucault's Pendulum
« Reply #158 on: December 14, 2008, 01:44:46 PM »
How does the third not require assumption? ???
Because you eliminate all other possibilities...
Not if you start eliminating from the bottom of the list...
If you do that, you must conclude that their is an unknown, unobserved, and undetectable force that distinguishes between pendulums and other objects, causing pendulums to swing as if the earth is rotating.

That is correct.  It distinguishes between a pendulum and other objects for the same reason the rotation of the earth supposedly distinguishes between a pendulum and other objects.
The rotation of the earth does not distinguish between a pendulum and other objects. The pendulum is suspended from a point which it is free to rotate around; if the point is moved, it is unaffected by rotation, because a point has no geometry. The pencil is on the ground and moves with the earth, which is not rapidly accelerating or decelerating.

Precisely my point.  Since the pendulum is swinging freely it is subject to the Coriolis Force.  The pencil on the ground is not.
Static friction. If you perform this experiment in a vacuum (to negate air resistance on an object with so little mass) with a pencil hanging from the string, you would experience the same effect.

Well, I'm glad we're in agreement then.  It is the mechanics of the pendulum that leaves it subject to the Coriolis Force.
Where did you educate the biology, in toulet?

*

Perfect Circle

  • 734
  • +0/-0
  • You are a pirate!
Re: Foucault's Pendulum
« Reply #159 on: December 14, 2008, 01:47:51 PM »
How does the third not require assumption? ???
Because you eliminate all other possibilities...
Not if you start eliminating from the bottom of the list...
If you do that, you must conclude that their is an unknown, unobserved, and undetectable force that distinguishes between pendulums and other objects, causing pendulums to swing as if the earth is rotating.

That is correct.  It distinguishes between a pendulum and other objects for the same reason the rotation of the earth supposedly distinguishes between a pendulum and other objects.
The rotation of the earth does not distinguish between a pendulum and other objects. The pendulum is suspended from a point which it is free to rotate around; if the point is moved, it is unaffected by rotation, because a point has no geometry. The pencil is on the ground and moves with the earth, which is not rapidly accelerating or decelerating.

Precisely my point.  Since the pendulum is swinging freely it is subject to the Coriolis Force.  The pencil on the ground is not.
Static friction. If you perform this experiment in a vacuum (to negate air resistance on an object with so little mass) with a pencil hanging from the string, you would experience the same effect.

Well, I'm glad we're in agreement then.  It is the mechanics of the pendulum that leaves it subject to the Coriolis Force.
Right, and not the material. There is no distinguishing, it is just that static friction (easily proven in either earth model) overcomes the Coriolis force of objects on the ground.
Like the sun, the stars are also expanding and contracting their diameter as they spin around the hub every six months.

?

Edtharan

  • 687
  • +0/-0
Re: Foucault's Pendulum
« Reply #160 on: December 14, 2008, 06:12:36 PM »
How does the third not require assumption? ???
Because you eliminate all other possibilities...
Not if you start eliminating from the bottom of the list...
If you do that, you must conclude that their is an unknown, unobserved, and undetectable force that distinguishes between pendulums and other objects, causing pendulums to swing as if the earth is rotating.

That is correct.  It distinguishes between a pendulum and other objects for the same reason the rotation of the earth supposedly distinguishes between a pendulum and other objects.
The rotation of the earth does not distinguish between a pendulum and other objects. The pendulum is suspended from a point which it is free to rotate around; if the point is moved, it is unaffected by rotation, because a point has no geometry. The pencil is on the ground and moves with the earth, which is not rapidly accelerating or decelerating.

Precisely my point.  Since the pendulum is swinging freely it is subject to the Coriolis Force.  The pencil on the ground is not.
Static friction. If you perform this experiment in a vacuum (to negate air resistance on an object with so little mass) with a pencil hanging from the string, you would experience the same effect.

Well, I'm glad we're in agreement then.  It is the mechanics of the pendulum that leaves it subject to the Coriolis Force.
However, as it has been claimed, the Flat Earth is not rotating and so no Coriolis force can exist for this model of the Flat Earth. As a non rotating Flat Earth can not cause a Coriolis effect, then we can use this experiment to prove that the Earth is rotating.

Note: This does not prove if the Earth is flat or not (i'll get to that).

So, if we can show that a pencil is not effected by a Force because it is not swinging, we can rule out an ouside force pushing on the pendulum. It must come from something the pendulum is doing that the pencil is not. This eliminates any "Celestial Force" acting on the pendulum form the rotating of the Heavens (or whatever).

And the only explanation then, of the pendulum, is due to the Earth rotation (Flat or otherwise), we can conclude that the rotation of the pendulum occurs because the Earth is rotating.

It is direct experimental proof that differentiates between a rotating and non rotating Earth (flat or round).

Now, onto why the pendulum proves a Round Earth:

On a Flat Earth, regardless form the centre of rotation you are, the pendulum will rotate 360 degrees with each rotation of the disk. The distance form the pole makes no difference to the rotational speed of the pendulum.

However, on a Round Earth, because of the angle that you are to the horizontal plane at the poles, the speed of rotation of the pendulum will vary. The distance you are from the poles will determine the rate of rotation of the Pendulum

Here is a difference between what would occur on a Flat Earth and a Round Earth with a pendulum that is appears to rotate due to the Coriolis effect.

As observations show that the rotation does indeed vary depending on the distance form the poles, we can therefore rule out that we are on a flat Earth and as the variance matches with the expected variance of a Round Earth it is very likely that we are on a Round Earth as we can not be on a Flat earth as this experiment shows.

There are 2 distinct effects that we are looking at there:

1) Pendulums appear to rotate and experiments designed to detect outside forces can find any. Therefore the Pendulum is not being influenced by outside forces and it must be due to the rotation of the Earth (flat or otherwise) because unless something is being influenced by an outside force, inertia states that it won't begin to move (and as inertia is used to explain the Force we feel as gravity on FE, we have to apply it to the pendulum too, as it can be show to have weight and therefore has inertia under FET)

2) The distance from the poles effects the observed apparent rotation of the Pendulum. As this is incompatible with FET, we can therefore rule out FET.

So, from these two experiment: Foccault's Pendulum, and the Pencil (or you could use a plum-bob) balancing experiment, we can conclude that there is no outside force acting on the pendulum so the Earth must be rotating and that the Earth is not a disk but must be a Spheroid due to the variance in apparent rotational velocity of the pendulum.

In other words: These experiment prove RET and disprove FET.
Everyday household experimentation.

*

Roundy the Truthinessist

  • Flat Earth TheFLAMETHROWER!
  • The Elder Ones
  • 26966
  • +0/-0
  • I'm the boss.
Re: Foucault's Pendulum
« Reply #161 on: December 14, 2008, 06:34:05 PM »
How does the third not require assumption? ???
Because you eliminate all other possibilities...
Not if you start eliminating from the bottom of the list...
If you do that, you must conclude that their is an unknown, unobserved, and undetectable force that distinguishes between pendulums and other objects, causing pendulums to swing as if the earth is rotating.

That is correct.  It distinguishes between a pendulum and other objects for the same reason the rotation of the earth supposedly distinguishes between a pendulum and other objects.
The rotation of the earth does not distinguish between a pendulum and other objects. The pendulum is suspended from a point which it is free to rotate around; if the point is moved, it is unaffected by rotation, because a point has no geometry. The pencil is on the ground and moves with the earth, which is not rapidly accelerating or decelerating.

Precisely my point.  Since the pendulum is swinging freely it is subject to the Coriolis Force.  The pencil on the ground is not.
Static friction. If you perform this experiment in a vacuum (to negate air resistance on an object with so little mass) with a pencil hanging from the string, you would experience the same effect.

Well, I'm glad we're in agreement then.  It is the mechanics of the pendulum that leaves it subject to the Coriolis Force.
However, as it has been claimed, the Flat Earth is not rotating and so no Coriolis force can exist for this model of the Flat Earth. As a non rotating Flat Earth can not cause a Coriolis effect, then we can use this experiment to prove that the Earth is rotating.

Nope.  As has been pointed out many times in the past, the Coriolis Force is believed to be a fundamental force tied to the rotation of the heavens.  It absolutely does not prove that the earth is rotating.
Where did you educate the biology, in toulet?

?

Edtharan

  • 687
  • +0/-0
Re: Foucault's Pendulum
« Reply #162 on: December 14, 2008, 06:44:10 PM »
Nope.  As has been pointed out many times in the past, the Coriolis Force is believed to be a fundamental force tied to the rotation of the heavens.  It absolutely does not prove that the earth is rotating.
As the Coriolis force can be demonstrated on a rotating platform (a Lazy Susan for instance) and the observations match what is predicted based solely on the rotation of the platform, we can use that to rule out the heavens having any influence on the pendulum on the platform. How does this celestial force differentiate between the pendulum on the platform and one that is not?

We are getting into layers here to explain the effects under FET.
Everyday household experimentation.

*

Roundy the Truthinessist

  • Flat Earth TheFLAMETHROWER!
  • The Elder Ones
  • 26966
  • +0/-0
  • I'm the boss.
Re: Foucault's Pendulum
« Reply #163 on: December 14, 2008, 06:46:14 PM »
Nope.  As has been pointed out many times in the past, the Coriolis Force is believed to be a fundamental force tied to the rotation of the heavens.  It absolutely does not prove that the earth is rotating.
As the Coriolis force can be demonstrated on a rotating platform (a Lazy Susan for instance) and the observations match what is predicted based solely on the rotation of the platform, we can use that to rule out the heavens having any influence on the pendulum on the platform. How does this celestial force differentiate between the pendulum on the platform and one that is not?

We are getting into layers here to explain the effects under FET.

I've never heard of such an experiment.  Can you provide a link?
Where did you educate the biology, in toulet?

?

Edtharan

  • 687
  • +0/-0
Re: Foucault's Pendulum
« Reply #164 on: December 14, 2008, 07:05:19 PM »
Nope.  As has been pointed out many times in the past, the Coriolis Force is believed to be a fundamental force tied to the rotation of the heavens.  It absolutely does not prove that the earth is rotating.
As the Coriolis force can be demonstrated on a rotating platform (a Lazy Susan for instance) and the observations match what is predicted based solely on the rotation of the platform, we can use that to rule out the heavens having any influence on the pendulum on the platform. How does this celestial force differentiate between the pendulum on the platform and one that is not?

We are getting into layers here to explain the effects under FET.

I've never heard of such an experiment.  Can you provide a link?

Buy a lazy Susan, buy a pendulum, set the pendulum swinging on the lazy Susan spin the lazy Susan and watch the results.
Everyday household experimentation.

*

Roundy the Truthinessist

  • Flat Earth TheFLAMETHROWER!
  • The Elder Ones
  • 26966
  • +0/-0
  • I'm the boss.
Re: Foucault's Pendulum
« Reply #165 on: December 14, 2008, 07:11:08 PM »
Nope.  As has been pointed out many times in the past, the Coriolis Force is believed to be a fundamental force tied to the rotation of the heavens.  It absolutely does not prove that the earth is rotating.
As the Coriolis force can be demonstrated on a rotating platform (a Lazy Susan for instance) and the observations match what is predicted based solely on the rotation of the platform, we can use that to rule out the heavens having any influence on the pendulum on the platform. How does this celestial force differentiate between the pendulum on the platform and one that is not?

We are getting into layers here to explain the effects under FET.

I've never heard of such an experiment.  Can you provide a link?

Buy a lazy Susan, buy a pendulum, set the pendulum swinging on the lazy Susan spin the lazy Susan and watch the results.

This doesn't sound like a particularly reliable experiment.  :-\
Where did you educate the biology, in toulet?

*

Perfect Circle

  • 734
  • +0/-0
  • You are a pirate!
Re: Foucault's Pendulum
« Reply #166 on: December 14, 2008, 07:23:05 PM »
How does the third not require assumption? ???
Because you eliminate all other possibilities...
Not if you start eliminating from the bottom of the list...
If you do that, you must conclude that their is an unknown, unobserved, and undetectable force that distinguishes between pendulums and other objects, causing pendulums to swing as if the earth is rotating.

That is correct.  It distinguishes between a pendulum and other objects for the same reason the rotation of the earth supposedly distinguishes between a pendulum and other objects.
The rotation of the earth does not distinguish between a pendulum and other objects. The pendulum is suspended from a point which it is free to rotate around; if the point is moved, it is unaffected by rotation, because a point has no geometry. The pencil is on the ground and moves with the earth, which is not rapidly accelerating or decelerating.

Precisely my point.  Since the pendulum is swinging freely it is subject to the Coriolis Force.  The pencil on the ground is not.
Static friction. If you perform this experiment in a vacuum (to negate air resistance on an object with so little mass) with a pencil hanging from the string, you would experience the same effect.

Well, I'm glad we're in agreement then.  It is the mechanics of the pendulum that leaves it subject to the Coriolis Force.
However, as it has been claimed, the Flat Earth is not rotating and so no Coriolis force can exist for this model of the Flat Earth. As a non rotating Flat Earth can not cause a Coriolis effect, then we can use this experiment to prove that the Earth is rotating.

Nope.  As has been pointed out many times in the past, the Coriolis Force is believed to be a fundamental force tied to the rotation of the heavens.  It absolutely does not prove that the earth is rotating.
That explanation does not make sense. Rotating heavens would act as a force in a westerly direction, not a rotational force, nor would it account for the opposite rotation in the southern hemisphere.
Like the sun, the stars are also expanding and contracting their diameter as they spin around the hub every six months.

?

Edtharan

  • 687
  • +0/-0
Re: Foucault's Pendulum
« Reply #167 on: December 14, 2008, 07:34:13 PM »
Nope.  As has been pointed out many times in the past, the Coriolis Force is believed to be a fundamental force tied to the rotation of the heavens.  It absolutely does not prove that the earth is rotating.
As the Coriolis force can be demonstrated on a rotating platform (a Lazy Susan for instance) and the observations match what is predicted based solely on the rotation of the platform, we can use that to rule out the heavens having any influence on the pendulum on the platform. How does this celestial force differentiate between the pendulum on the platform and one that is not?

We are getting into layers here to explain the effects under FET.

I've never heard of such an experiment.  Can you provide a link?

Buy a lazy Susan, buy a pendulum, set the pendulum swinging on the lazy Susan spin the lazy Susan and watch the results.

This doesn't sound like a particularly reliable experiment.  :-\
Well it is at least as good as just looking out of Windows (Tom are you reading?).  ;D

Depending on the speed you rotate the platform and the accuracy of your equipment, it can be very accurate. As with all experiments, there are going to be errors. This is why science uses mathematics and very sophisticated equipment so as  to give them the accuracy they need to be certain.

As any links to government or NASA sites is immediately shot down, I am not able to directly link to the data. However, I gave this experiment simply because it demonstrate both the principals behind the data, and that despite the complexity of their equipment when doing so, the principals are actually quite easy to confirm if you are willing to allow for a degree of inaccuracy.
Everyday household experimentation.

*

Roundy the Truthinessist

  • Flat Earth TheFLAMETHROWER!
  • The Elder Ones
  • 26966
  • +0/-0
  • I'm the boss.
Re: Foucault's Pendulum
« Reply #168 on: December 14, 2008, 07:41:43 PM »
Nope.  As has been pointed out many times in the past, the Coriolis Force is believed to be a fundamental force tied to the rotation of the heavens.  It absolutely does not prove that the earth is rotating.
As the Coriolis force can be demonstrated on a rotating platform (a Lazy Susan for instance) and the observations match what is predicted based solely on the rotation of the platform, we can use that to rule out the heavens having any influence on the pendulum on the platform. How does this celestial force differentiate between the pendulum on the platform and one that is not?

We are getting into layers here to explain the effects under FET.

I've never heard of such an experiment.  Can you provide a link?

Buy a lazy Susan, buy a pendulum, set the pendulum swinging on the lazy Susan spin the lazy Susan and watch the results.

This doesn't sound like a particularly reliable experiment.  :-\
Well it is at least as good as just looking out of Windows (Tom are you reading?).  ;D

Depending on the speed you rotate the platform and the accuracy of your equipment, it can be very accurate. As with all experiments, there are going to be errors. This is why science uses mathematics and very sophisticated equipment so as  to give them the accuracy they need to be certain.

Right, that's my point.  Neither a lazy Susan nor a store-bought pendulum really strikes me as "very sophisticated equipment".
Where did you educate the biology, in toulet?

?

Edtharan

  • 687
  • +0/-0
Re: Foucault's Pendulum
« Reply #169 on: December 15, 2008, 04:16:25 AM »
On a Flat Earth, regardless form the centre of rotation you are, the pendulum will rotate 360 degrees with each rotation of the disk. The distance form the pole makes no difference to the rotational speed of the pendulum.

However, FE Theory is that the earth does not rotate at all! Yikes!

And as we can rule out an outside force with other experiments, we can conclude that because we can observe the precession of a Foccault's Pendulum we are in fact on a Round Earth that Rotates.
Everyday household experimentation.

*

Roundy the Truthinessist

  • Flat Earth TheFLAMETHROWER!
  • The Elder Ones
  • 26966
  • +0/-0
  • I'm the boss.
Re: Foucault's Pendulum
« Reply #170 on: December 15, 2008, 11:14:57 AM »
On a Flat Earth, regardless form the centre of rotation you are, the pendulum will rotate 360 degrees with each rotation of the disk. The distance form the pole makes no difference to the rotational speed of the pendulum.

However, FE Theory is that the earth does not rotate at all! Yikes!

And as we can rule out an outside force with other experiments, we can conclude that because we can observe the precession of a Foccault's Pendulum we are in fact on a Round Earth that Rotates.

You have yet to provide a reliable experiment that rules out an outside force.  In fact you haven't shown any evidence that your hypothetical experiment has ever even been performed.  Until I see something reasonable countering it I have to assume that an outside force is plausible.
Where did you educate the biology, in toulet?

?

Edtharan

  • 687
  • +0/-0
Re: Foucault's Pendulum
« Reply #171 on: December 15, 2008, 07:48:28 PM »
On a Flat Earth, regardless form the centre of rotation you are, the pendulum will rotate 360 degrees with each rotation of the disk. The distance form the pole makes no difference to the rotational speed of the pendulum.

However, FE Theory is that the earth does not rotate at all! Yikes!

And as we can rule out an outside force with other experiments, we can conclude that because we can observe the precession of a Foccault's Pendulum we are in fact on a Round Earth that Rotates.

You have yet to provide a reliable experiment that rules out an outside force.  In fact you haven't shown any evidence that your hypothetical experiment has ever even been performed.  Until I see something reasonable countering it I have to assume that an outside force is plausible.
If there is an outside force acting on the pendulum, then it should also act on other object whether they are moving or not. Thus is the pendulum is brought to a halt, and left as it is, it should move slightly to one side due to the outside force. Further more, if there is an outside force, it would be independent of the mass of the pendulum, this means that we should see heavier pendulums rotate slower than light pendulums, but this is not the case.

As such we can rule out an outside force that is not magical (ie breaks the laws of physics and is completely non-testable).
Everyday household experimentation.

*

Username

  • President of The Flat Earth Society
  • Administrator
  • 18223
  • +41/-81
  • Most Accurate Scientist Ever
Re: Foucault's Pendulum
« Reply #172 on: December 15, 2008, 07:54:43 PM »
One should also note the general inaccuracy of foucalt pendulums.  There are several times they just go wacky at predictable times for no reason in the RE model.  Things like the allais effect, et al.

Does RE theory have an answer to these wild and predictable changes that don't fit your model?
If you can't argue both sides, you understand neither

*

Roundy the Truthinessist

  • Flat Earth TheFLAMETHROWER!
  • The Elder Ones
  • 26966
  • +0/-0
  • I'm the boss.
Re: Foucault's Pendulum
« Reply #173 on: December 15, 2008, 08:31:08 PM »
On a Flat Earth, regardless form the centre of rotation you are, the pendulum will rotate 360 degrees with each rotation of the disk. The distance form the pole makes no difference to the rotational speed of the pendulum.

However, FE Theory is that the earth does not rotate at all! Yikes!

And as we can rule out an outside force with other experiments, we can conclude that because we can observe the precession of a Foccault's Pendulum we are in fact on a Round Earth that Rotates.

You have yet to provide a reliable experiment that rules out an outside force.  In fact you haven't shown any evidence that your hypothetical experiment has ever even been performed.  Until I see something reasonable countering it I have to assume that an outside force is plausible.
If there is an outside force acting on the pendulum, then it should also act on other object whether they are moving or not. Thus is the pendulum is brought to a halt, and left as it is, it should move slightly to one side due to the outside force. Further more, if there is an outside force, it would be independent of the mass of the pendulum, this means that we should see heavier pendulums rotate slower than light pendulums, but this is not the case.

As such we can rule out an outside force that is not magical (ie breaks the laws of physics and is completely non-testable).


Hmm.  But gravity is widely recognized by the non-FE community to be a force, and if I drop a bowling bowl and a tennis ball from some height above the earth's surface, their rate of acceleration due to gravity will be the same despite having wildly differing masses.  Is gravity magical, then?  ???
Where did you educate the biology, in toulet?

*

Username

  • President of The Flat Earth Society
  • Administrator
  • 18223
  • +41/-81
  • Most Accurate Scientist Ever
Re: Foucault's Pendulum
« Reply #174 on: December 15, 2008, 08:37:36 PM »
pseudoforce
If you can't argue both sides, you understand neither

*

Perfect Circle

  • 734
  • +0/-0
  • You are a pirate!
Re: Foucault's Pendulum
« Reply #175 on: December 15, 2008, 10:56:33 PM »
On a Flat Earth, regardless form the centre of rotation you are, the pendulum will rotate 360 degrees with each rotation of the disk. The distance form the pole makes no difference to the rotational speed of the pendulum.

However, FE Theory is that the earth does not rotate at all! Yikes!

And as we can rule out an outside force with other experiments, we can conclude that because we can observe the precession of a Foccault's Pendulum we are in fact on a Round Earth that Rotates.

You have yet to provide a reliable experiment that rules out an outside force.  In fact you haven't shown any evidence that your hypothetical experiment has ever even been performed.  Until I see something reasonable countering it I have to assume that an outside force is plausible.
If there is an outside force acting on the pendulum, then it should also act on other object whether they are moving or not. Thus is the pendulum is brought to a halt, and left as it is, it should move slightly to one side due to the outside force. Further more, if there is an outside force, it would be independent of the mass of the pendulum, this means that we should see heavier pendulums rotate slower than light pendulums, but this is not the case.

As such we can rule out an outside force that is not magical (ie breaks the laws of physics and is completely non-testable).


Hmm.  But gravity is widely recognized by the non-FE community to be a force, and if I drop a bowling bowl and a tennis ball from some height above the earth's surface, their rate of acceleration due to gravity will be the same despite having wildly differing masses.  Is gravity magical, then?  ???
I have no idea what I'm talking about, but maybe the remaining additional force is used to overcome inertia?
Like the sun, the stars are also expanding and contracting their diameter as they spin around the hub every six months.

*

Username

  • President of The Flat Earth Society
  • Administrator
  • 18223
  • +41/-81
  • Most Accurate Scientist Ever
Re: Foucault's Pendulum
« Reply #176 on: December 16, 2008, 04:47:42 AM »
Gravity is not a force, it is a pseudo force.  This is why the mass of the objects does not matter.
If you can't argue both sides, you understand neither

?

NTheGreat

  • 1019
  • +0/-0
Re: Foucault's Pendulum
« Reply #177 on: December 16, 2008, 04:53:23 AM »
Quote
One should also note the general inaccuracy of foucalt pendulums.  There are several times they just go wacky at predictable times for no reason in the RE model.  Things like the allais effect, et al.

Does RE theory have an answer to these wild and predictable changes that don't fit your model?

Decided to look up the allais effect on wikipedia:
Quote from: Wikipedia
The factual accuracy of this article is disputed.
Quote from: Wikipedia
A recent published article on the topic in a mainstream scientific journal (Flandern, 2003) concludes that there have been "no unambiguous detections [of an Allais effect] within the past 30 years when consciousness of the importance of [experimental] controls was more widespread.

And besides, does the FE model have an answer to these wild and predictable changes that don't fit your model?

*

Username

  • President of The Flat Earth Society
  • Administrator
  • 18223
  • +41/-81
  • Most Accurate Scientist Ever
Re: Foucault's Pendulum
« Reply #178 on: December 16, 2008, 07:01:43 AM »
Gravity is not a force, it is a pseudo force.  This is why the mass of the objects does not matter.

Oh ffs.
All fictitious forces are proportional to the mass of the object upon which they act.  Gravity does this.  Real forces do not.

I'm not sure what your "ffs" is all about.
If you can't argue both sides, you understand neither

*

Raist

  • The Elder Ones
  • 30499
  • +0/-0
  • The cat in the Matrix
Re: Foucault's Pendulum
« Reply #179 on: December 16, 2008, 07:45:53 AM »
Gravity is not a force, it is a pseudo force.  This is why the mass of the objects does not matter.

Oh ffs.

He doesn't get it. I wish engy was here to explain this to him.