# The Foucault Pendulum...

• 47 Replies
• 17181 Views

#### Raebodep

• 87
##### The Foucault Pendulum...
« on: May 25, 2010, 05:45:34 PM »
I want to believe in FET I really do but... someone please explain to me if the FET is true how come we can measure the rotation of earth with a Pendulum which would mean the Earth was round. For example the Foucault Pendulum which was the first device that demonstrated the Earth's rotation that wasn't based on the sun the moon and all other celestial bodies.

So the fact this thing works proves everything I hoped to believe wrong. I've seen these in real life and if you live in or near Philly you can go view one yourself at the Franklin Institute

All Data provided here...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Foucault_pendulum

He didn't just wake up one morning and say "I wonder what shape the earth is".  Instead he woke up and said, "the earth looks flat, now how can I proved it".

#### WardoggKC130FE

• 11842
• What website is that? MadeUpMonkeyShit.com?
##### Re: The Foucault Pendulum...
« Reply #1 on: May 25, 2010, 06:09:44 PM »
The answers you seek my friend, are found with the search button.  Just type in pendulum and read until your hearts content.

#### Raebodep

• 87
##### Re: The Foucault Pendulum...
« Reply #2 on: May 25, 2010, 07:15:18 PM »
The answers you seek my friend, are found with the search button.  Just type in pendulum and read until your hearts content.

No all I got was a bunch of stuff speculating saying magnets which I seen disproved live at the Franklin Institute during a tour where the tour guide put up a a metal object to prove there was no magnets. There was no reasonable answer no scientific answer just a bunch of speculating and you guys saying check the information for yourself when people are asking you to provide because they can't find it. If you guys want me to believe you will actually have to show me because I've seen this work in person with no strings attached.

I need you guys to provide me with the facts and the data please.
He didn't just wake up one morning and say "I wonder what shape the earth is".  Instead he woke up and said, "the earth looks flat, now how can I proved it".

#### Lorddave

• 15439
##### Re: The Foucault Pendulum...
« Reply #3 on: May 25, 2010, 07:19:08 PM »
The answers you seek my friend, are found with the search button.  Just type in pendulum and read until your hearts content.

No all I got was a bunch of stuff speculating saying magnets which I seen disproved live at the Franklin Institute during a tour where the tour guide put up a a metal object to prove there was no magnets. There was no reasonable answer no scientific answer just a bunch of speculating and you guys saying check the information for yourself when people are asking you to provide because they can't find it. If you guys want me to believe you will actually have to show me because I've seen this work in person with no strings attached.

I need you guys to provide me with the facts and the data please.

You won't find what you seek then.

The fact is the Earth is Round.  There are only a few people in the whole world.  Less than 1,000 people among 10 BILLION who believe the Earth is flat.  This is a much smaller population than the number of people who suffer from delusions and are institutionalized.

Those here who would argue against you are either trolls who want to tease you or people who are delusional and thus ignore any and all evidence that doesn't fit in their universe view.  And no matter how much they say they follow science and reason, they don't, they won't, and they'll come up with irrational explanations for observations that are only justifiable in their own minds.

?

#### Space Tourist

• 228
##### Re: The Foucault Pendulum...
« Reply #4 on: May 25, 2010, 07:26:34 PM »
Aluminum Pendulum now what?
cant be magnets becouse Alu isnt magnetic...
Then you have provided evidence for the Earth being a sphere

?

#### Vongeo

• Official Member
• 6004
• I don't get it either.
##### Re: The Foucault Pendulum...
« Reply #5 on: May 25, 2010, 07:36:46 PM »
The answers you seek my friend, are found with the search button.  Just type in pendulum and read until your hearts content.

No all I got was a bunch of stuff speculating saying magnets which I seen disproved live at the Franklin Institute during a tour where the tour guide put up a a metal object to prove there was no magnets. There was no reasonable answer no scientific answer just a bunch of speculating and you guys saying check the information for yourself when people are asking you to provide because they can't find it. If you guys want me to believe you will actually have to show me because I've seen this work in person with no strings attached.

I need you guys to provide me with the facts and the data please.

You won't find what you seek then.

The fact is the Earth is Round.  There are only a few people in the whole world.  Less than 1,000 people among 10 BILLION who believe the Earth is flat.  This is a much smaller population than the number of people who suffer from delusions and are institutionalized.

Those here who would argue against you are either trolls who want to tease you or people who are delusional and thus ignore any and all evidence that doesn't fit in their universe view.  And no matter how much they say they follow science and reason, they don't, they won't, and they'll come up with irrational explanations for observations that are only justifiable in their own minds.
Where do you did youg get your beleivers numbers at. I know that many uneducate and super educated countries beleive in A flat earth. Also couldn't this piece of metal used be set up with very hard to see string attached(used in a metaphor not real strings) It could also be motorryzed.
Vongeo is a wanker, he wears a wanker hat; he always smells like urine and he thinks the Earth is flat.

No longer is this sentence is cut in half. Jekra!

#### Lorddave

• 15439
##### Re: The Foucault Pendulum...
« Reply #6 on: May 25, 2010, 07:50:45 PM »
The answers you seek my friend, are found with the search button.  Just type in pendulum and read until your hearts content.

No all I got was a bunch of stuff speculating saying magnets which I seen disproved live at the Franklin Institute during a tour where the tour guide put up a a metal object to prove there was no magnets. There was no reasonable answer no scientific answer just a bunch of speculating and you guys saying check the information for yourself when people are asking you to provide because they can't find it. If you guys want me to believe you will actually have to show me because I've seen this work in person with no strings attached.

I need you guys to provide me with the facts and the data please.

You won't find what you seek then.

The fact is the Earth is Round.  There are only a few people in the whole world.  Less than 1,000 people among 10 BILLION who believe the Earth is flat.  This is a much smaller population than the number of people who suffer from delusions and are institutionalized.

Those here who would argue against you are either trolls who want to tease you or people who are delusional and thus ignore any and all evidence that doesn't fit in their universe view.  And no matter how much they say they follow science and reason, they don't, they won't, and they'll come up with irrational explanations for observations that are only justifiable in their own minds.
Where do you did youg get your beleivers numbers at. I know that many uneducate and super educated countries beleive in A flat earth. Also couldn't this piece of metal used be set up with very hard to see string attached(used in a metaphor not real strings) It could also be motorryzed.

Well...
Just a guess really.  And while there are many uneducated countries out there, I don't count them.  Ignorance is not the same as belief.  Though to be fair, the shape of the Earth is common knowledge.  I'm sure most, if not everyone knows that the Earth is round regardless of how poor their country is.  It's just that they have better things to do than talk about it.

As for the pendulum:
Well...

When it was invented, the electric motor didn't exist and really small and hard to see strings were not available.

Also, I've been to the Franklin institute and saw that pendulum.  If it's on strings, those strings must be intangible as I can move my hand all around it.

#### Raebodep

• 87
##### Re: The Foucault Pendulum...
« Reply #7 on: May 25, 2010, 07:53:53 PM »
The answers you seek my friend, are found with the search button.  Just type in pendulum and read until your hearts content.

No all I got was a bunch of stuff speculating saying magnets which I seen disproved live at the Franklin Institute during a tour where the tour guide put up a a metal object to prove there was no magnets. There was no reasonable answer no scientific answer just a bunch of speculating and you guys saying check the information for yourself when people are asking you to provide because they can't find it. If you guys want me to believe you will actually have to show me because I've seen this work in person with no strings attached.

I need you guys to provide me with the facts and the data please.

You won't find what you seek then.

The fact is the Earth is Round.  There are only a few people in the whole world.  Less than 1,000 people among 10 BILLION who believe the Earth is flat.  This is a much smaller population than the number of people who suffer from delusions and are institutionalized.

Those here who would argue against you are either trolls who want to tease you or people who are delusional and thus ignore any and all evidence that doesn't fit in their universe view.  And no matter how much they say they follow science and reason, they don't, they won't, and they'll come up with irrational explanations for observations that are only justifiable in their own minds.
Where do you did youg get your beleivers numbers at. I know that many uneducate and super educated countries beleive in A flat earth. Also couldn't this piece of metal used be set up with very hard to see string attached(used in a metaphor not real strings) It could also be motorryzed.

No not at all it resides in a stairwell of the building which everyone is free to climb up to the top and see where it is attached to the ceiling and it is clear that there is no motorized* (dunno how you spelled that wrong no offense) equipment. It is also very quiet in there so if a motor was running you would hear it as well. As for your string theory well I highly doubt you could have very thin string control such a large and heavy tool such as that. There would have to thick or have many which either way would be visible
He didn't just wake up one morning and say "I wonder what shape the earth is".  Instead he woke up and said, "the earth looks flat, now how can I proved it".

#### parsec

• 6196
• 206,265
##### Re: The Foucault Pendulum...
« Reply #8 on: May 25, 2010, 07:55:17 PM »
Aluminum Pendulum now what?
cant be magnets becouse Alu isnt magnetic...

Accidentally or not, google Foucault currents.

#### Raebodep

• 87
##### Re: The Foucault Pendulum...
« Reply #9 on: May 25, 2010, 07:58:35 PM »
Aluminum Pendulum now what?
cant be magnets becouse Alu isnt magnetic...

Accidentally or not, google Foucault currents.

A blank Foucault Current Wikitonary page?
He didn't just wake up one morning and say "I wonder what shape the earth is".  Instead he woke up and said, "the earth looks flat, now how can I proved it".

#### parsec

• 6196
• 206,265
##### Re: The Foucault Pendulum...
« Reply #10 on: May 25, 2010, 07:59:22 PM »
Aluminum Pendulum now what?
cant be magnets becouse Alu isnt magnetic...

Accidentally or not, google Foucault currents.

A blank Foucault Current Wikitonary page?
It's the older name for eddy currents. Yes, it's the same scientist.

#### Raebodep

• 87
##### Re: The Foucault Pendulum...
« Reply #11 on: May 25, 2010, 08:01:38 PM »
Aluminum Pendulum now what?
cant be magnets becouse Alu isnt magnetic...

Accidentally or not, google Foucault currents.

A blank Foucault Current Wikitonary page?
It's the older name for eddy currents. Yes, it's the same scientist.

I don't see the point your trying to make but ok. lol
He didn't just wake up one morning and say "I wonder what shape the earth is".  Instead he woke up and said, "the earth looks flat, now how can I proved it".

#### markjo

• Content Nazi
• The Elder Ones
• 38908
##### Re: The Foucault Pendulum...
« Reply #12 on: May 25, 2010, 08:02:27 PM »
Aluminum Pendulum now what?
cant be magnets becouse Alu isnt magnetic...

Accidentally or not, google Foucault currents.

A blank Foucault Current Wikitonary page?
It's the older name for eddy currents. Yes, it's the same scientist.
How exactly are these eddy currents supposed to affect the pendulum?
Science is what happens when preconception meets verification.
Quote from: Robosteve
Besides, perhaps FET is a conspiracy too.
Quote from: bullhorn
It is just the way it is, you understanding it doesn't concern me.

?

#### Vongeo

• Official Member
• 6004
• I don't get it either.
##### Re: The Foucault Pendulum...
« Reply #13 on: May 25, 2010, 08:04:04 PM »
I spelt motorized wrong because my post box is screwed up and when I type things to long the scroll buttons freak out and its a hassle to spell anything.  Anywhoozle, they can make motors pretty small and soundless now, with a good amount of power.
Vongeo is a wanker, he wears a wanker hat; he always smells like urine and he thinks the Earth is flat.

No longer is this sentence is cut in half. Jekra!

#### parsec

• 6196
• 206,265
##### Re: The Foucault Pendulum...
« Reply #14 on: May 25, 2010, 08:06:18 PM »
He said the pendulum is made from aluminum and it won't be affected by magnets. This is not true. Eddy currents get induced in any moving conducting body (such as an aluminum pendulum) in a magnetic field. Then, there is an Ampere's force acting on these currents and thus affecting the motion of the pendulum.

#### Raebodep

• 87
##### Re: The Foucault Pendulum...
« Reply #15 on: May 25, 2010, 08:22:05 PM »
I spelt motorized wrong because my post box is screwed up and when I type things to long the scroll buttons freak out and its a hassle to spell anything.  Anywhoozle, they can make motors pretty small and soundless now, with a good amount of power.

For this you would need a decent sized motor for the weight of this at which point you would hear it. Of course if you can find a motor of small size that is quiet that can move such a large object please show me it. I haven't seen such a motor.

Also motors don't account Fourcault Pendulum since there were no motors back then.

Also at the Franklin Institute as I said they proved to us there was no magnets to effect its movement.
He didn't just wake up one morning and say "I wonder what shape the earth is".  Instead he woke up and said, "the earth looks flat, now how can I proved it".

#### parsec

• 6196
• 206,265
##### Re: The Foucault Pendulum...
« Reply #16 on: May 25, 2010, 08:25:56 PM »
Also at the Franklin Institute as I said they proved to us there was no magnets to effect its movement.

The answers you seek my friend, are found with the search button.  Just type in pendulum and read until your hearts content.

No all I got was a bunch of stuff speculating saying magnets which I seen disproved live at the Franklin Institute during a tour where the tour guide put up a a metal object to prove there was no magnets.

Wow. What a proof? Just above, one poster argued that aluminum is not attracted by magnets. Did the guide prove the metal object was ferromagnetic? How about electromagnets? They can be turned on and off.

?

#### Vongeo

• Official Member
• 6004
• I don't get it either.
##### Re: The Foucault Pendulum...
« Reply #17 on: May 25, 2010, 08:30:14 PM »
What if they used an electromagnet and turned it off for the example to prove it worked without magents and the force that it already had to swing it with momentum and turned the magnets on at the end of the example? Thats how I'd do it.
Also at the Franklin Institute as I said they proved to us there was no magnets to effect its movement.

The answers you seek my friend, are found with the search button.  Just type in pendulum and read until your hearts content.

No all I got was a bunch of stuff speculating saying magnets which I seen disproved live at the Franklin Institute during a tour where the tour guide put up a a metal object to prove there was no magnets.

Wow. What a proof? Just above, one poster argued that aluminum is not attracted by magnets. Did the guide prove the metal object was ferromagnetic? How about electromagnets? They can be turned on and off.
I was posting this before you. Damn you and your higher detail!
Vongeo is a wanker, he wears a wanker hat; he always smells like urine and he thinks the Earth is flat.

No longer is this sentence is cut in half. Jekra!

?

#### smaller

• 55
##### Re: The Foucault Pendulum...
« Reply #18 on: May 25, 2010, 09:48:28 PM »
they can make motors pretty small and soundless now, with a good amount of power.

Pics or it didnt happen.

Plz tell me how the fcuk a motor that is totally concealed within an object would be able to affect that objects movement.

A quote from one of rthe admins in the believers section
Quote
What is this nonsense, why is the shape of the
Earth being contested in this forum? What is
going on?
Oh the irony

#### sandokhan

• Flat Earth Sultan
• Flat Earth Scientist
• 4896
##### Re: The Foucault Pendulum...
« Reply #19 on: May 25, 2010, 11:44:54 PM »
Did anybody mention the Foucault Pendulum? Here are the facts for all of you...

Heliocentrism (or the more commonly referred to Acentrism) has never been proven, despite having been taught as fact for the last four-hundred years. Even supposed proofs like Foucault's Pendulum do not prove the rotation of the world either, because firstly on a very basic level this phenomenon could be explained in a geocentric model via the gravitational pull caused by the rotation of the entire universe rotating diurnally about a fixed Earth.

The true answer is that all of the serous three story high pendulums that are located in museums around the world (like the one in Paris for example), have there own problems which are not usually talked about.

For instance, not many know that at the very top of the pendulum next to the cable mounting there is a small motorized pin that always stays horizontally opposed to the cable. This pin rotates very slowly, once daily, so as to always ensure the pendulums reliability when hitting the radial teeth once every hour as it swings to and fro. Finally, the pendulum is always cranked up every morning by the caretaker.

From Galileo was wrong:

One can imagine why many who were looking for proof of a rotating Earth would appeal to the Foucault pendulum. It seems logical to posit that the reason the plane of the pendulum appears to be moving in a circle is that the Earth beneath it is rotating. In other words, the heliocentrist insists that the pendulum's circular motion is an illusion. The pendulum is actually moving back-and-forth in the same plane and the Earth is turning beneath it. Since the Earth is too big for us to sense its rotation, we instead observe the plane of the pendulum rotate. All one need do to prove the Earth is rotating, he insists, is to reverse the roles, that is, imagine the plane of the pendulum is stationary and the Earth beneath it is moving. This particular logic, however, doesn't prove that the Earth is rotating. One can begin the critique by asking this simple question: if the pendulum is constantly swinging in the same plane (while the Earth is rotating beneath it), what force is holding the pendulum in that stationary position? In other words, if the plane of the pendulum is stationary, with respect to what is it stationary? This is understood as an 'unresolved' force in physics. The only possible answer is: it is stationary with respect to the rest of the universe, since it is certainly not stationary with respect to the Earth. With a little insight one can see that this brings us right back to the problem that Einstein and the rest of modern physics faced with the advent of Relativity theory: is it the Earth that is rotating under fixed stars, or do the stars revolve around a fixed Earth? As Einstein said: 'The two sentences: the sun is at rest and the Earth moves, or the sun moves and the Earth is at rest, would simply mean two different conventions concerning two different coordinate systems.'

As such, it would be just as logical, not to mention scientifically consistent, to posit that the combined forces of the universe which rotate around the Earth are causing the plane of the pendulum to rotate around an immobile Earth. In other words, in the geocentric model the movement of the pendulum is not an illusion' it really moves. According to Einstein, there is no difference between the two models. Ernst Mach, from whom Einstein developed many of his insights, stated much the same. He writes: 'Obviously, it doesn't matter if we think of the Earth as turning round on its axis, or at rest while the fixed stars revolve round it. Geometrically these are exactly the same case of a relative rotation of the Earth and the fixed stars with respect to one another. But if we think of the Earth at rest and the fixed stars revolving round it, there is no flattening of the Earth, no Foucault's experiment, and so on..'.

Barbour and Bertotti proved that a large hollow sphere (representing the distant star fields) rotating around a small solid sphere inside (modeling the Earth) produced exactly the same pattern of Coriolis and centrifugal forces that are claimed as proof of Earth's spinning in space. If the hollow shell of matter accelerates or rotates, any object inside the shell will tend to be carried along with the acceleration or rotation to some extent. But they note this all-important fact: An object at the center of the hollow sphere will not be affected by the inertial forces. The space around the Earth will exhibit the inertial effects of the distant sphere, but not the Earth itself, if it is centrally located.

From Mach's principle we can conclude that inertia is a universal property, like gravity. But in Mach's principle the conventional interpretation of distant masses as causing inertial effects around the Earth is too restrictive. The cause of inertia could also logically be the properties of the space around each object, modified by the presence of the mass in or around that space. In other words the ether/firmament may be the source of inertia, which causes the gravity and inertial effects on bodies embedded in the ether. The ether's properties are changed by the masses (via feedback), but it is the ether that is the primary or first cause. Linear inertia is the resistance to motion of objects moving linearly caused by the ether drag.

Einstein was intrigued by, but ambiguous about, Mach's principle. This is strange, because Mach's principle states a principle of relativity for rotation, similar to Special Relativity's assertion concerning relative linear motion. An inconsistency with relativity would arise if rotational effects were not reciprocal. Distant masses would be discounted as a potent source of inertia.

No measurement of absolute or preferred rotation has been made to test whether the Earth is rotating or its surroundings. Until such a test is performed, Mach's principle is a valid statement; it has not been disproven experimentally. It is only a hurdle in the minds of those who wish it were not so.

By maintaining the relativity of all motion, especially rotational motion, Mach denied the existence of absolute motion and of absolute space. Accordingly, he maintained the equivalence of the Ptolemaic and the Copernican systems and the equivalence of rotating-system/fixed-universe and universe-rotating/fixed-system situations.

The Foucault Pendulum

By 1851, despite Copernicus, Galileo and Kepler no proof existed of the rotation of the earth.

At that time a Jesuit named Leon Foucault 'invented' a contrivance that supposedly PROVED the rotation of the earth.

The Foucault pendulum was just another Jesuit hoax like the Piltdown man.

Foucault was a failure until Napoleon III became his patron!!

Foucault was a failure at everything he did until Louis Napoleon became his patron. Louis was the nephew of the emperor Napoleon Bonaparte and became president of France in 1848. In 1851, he abolished civil liberties and declared himself dictator of France.

Foucault's pendulum in the church of the Pantheon in Paris. The pendulum had a specially rigged device on top to make it sway a certain way. Of course it was not visible from the floor. Notice also that the pendulum was not swinging in a VACUUM where air currents could not influence its sway.

In front of this display was a big sign which read: COME SEE THE PROOF THAT THE EARTH IS TURNING!!

The French scientific community were not amused by Foucault's folly and refused to make him a member of the French Academy.

Pressure from the emperor finally caused them to relent and 2 years before his death, Foucault was finally made a member of that august body.

Ernst Mach proposed that it is the weight of the stars circling the Earth that drags Foucault pendulums around, creates Coriolis forces in the air that give the cyclones to our weather etc. Barbour and Bertotti (Il Nuovo Cimento 32B(1):1-27, 11 March 1977) proved that a hollow sphere (the universe) rotating around a solid sphere inside (the Earth) produced exactly the same results of Coriolis forces, dragging of Foucault pendulums etc. that are put forward as 'proofs' of heliocentricity!

Richard Elmendorf has done a tremendous amount of research on the Foucault Pendulum and has published it in an illustrated 84-page monograph entitled Heliocentric Humbug! A critical investigation of the Foucault Pendulum.

It may be ordered for $5 from the Pittsburgh Creation Society, P.O. Box 267, Bairdford, PA 15006, U.S.A. Please add appropriate postage (about$2.50 should cover postage, and shipping envelope, I think).

One personal note about Elmendorf's work. He writes that most Foucault pendulums are not free-swinging, that they are damped and are constrained to swing in a plane. Without such damping the bob tends to start tracing out an ellipse which makes it hard to see the precession.

Now, we go on to the GEOCENTRIC CORIOLIS EFFECT:

Mach's Principle/Geocentric Coriolis Effect

"The effect of the Coriolis force is an apparent deflection of the path of an object that moves within a rotating coordinate system. The object does not actually deviate from its path, but it appears to do so because of the motion of the coordinate system. On the Earth an object that moves along a north-south path, or longitudinal line, will undergo apparent deflection to the right in the Northern Hemisphere and to the left in the Southern Hemisphere."

By maintaining the relativity of all motion, especially rotational motion, E. Mach denied the existence of absolute motion and of absolute space. Accordingly, Mach maintained the equivalence of the Ptolemaic and the Copernican systems and the equivalence of rotating-system/fixed-universe and universe-rotating/fixed-system situations.

Mach's Principle: A body experiences no inertial forces when it is at rest or in uniform motion with respect to the center of mass of the entire universe. When its motion is nonuniform (accelerated) with respect to the total mass of the universe, it experiences forces such as centrifugal force and the Coriolis effect. Hence, the "local" behavior of matter is influenced by the "global" properties of the universe, i.e., those properties that describe the universe as a whole, which are studied in cosmology.

More details, concerning the application of Mach's Principle to Foucault's Pendulum can be found here:

http://theflatearthsociety.net/talk/viewtopic.php?p=11374#p11374

The Lense-Thirring effect as a consequence of Mach's Principle:

H. Thirring observed that the complete equivalence between the reference frames, explaining such phenomena as the Foucault pendulum equally well in a geocentric reference frame, is secured by definition by Einstein's 1915 work: "the required equivalence appears to be guaranteed by the general co-variance of the field equations." That is, Einstein's field equations are structured to supply the necessary upward force on the geosynchronous satellite in a geocentric as well as a heliocentric framework. Thus, H. Thirring notes that: "...in an Einsteinian gravitational field, caused by distant rotating masses, forces appear which are analogous to the centrifugal and Coriolis forces."

Max Born in his famous book,"Einstein's Theory of Relativity", Dover Publications,1962, pgs. 344 & 345 says:

"...Thus we may return to Ptolemy's point of view of a 'motionless earth'...One has to show that the transformed metric can be regarded as produced according to Einstein's field equations, by distant rotating masses. This has been done by Thirring. He calculated a field due to a rotating, hollow, thick-walled sphere and proved that inside the cavity it behaved as though there were centrifugal and other inertial forces usually attributed to absolute space.

Thus from Einstein's point of view, Ptolemy and Corpenicus are equally right."

Einstein himself also says:

"The struggle, so violent in the early days of science, between the views of Ptolemy and Copernicus would then be quite meaningless. Either CS could be used with equal justification. The two sentences, 'the sun is at rest and the earth moves,' or 'the sun moves and the earth is at rest,' would simply mean two different conventions concerning two different CS. -- Einstein and Infeld, The Evolution of Physics, p.212 (p.248 in original 1938 ed.)"

Therefore, distant rotary masses can cause local inertial forces, like the Coriolis and centrifugal forces, which perfectly mimic the inertial effects of a spinning Earth . This implies that there are two possible explanations for the inertial forces whenever objects are in relative rotational motion.

Mach's principle has been confirmed in theory by Hans Thirring and no experimental test has ever disproved this principle of relative motion.

The experiment performed by J. Barbour and B. Bertotti proved that a large hollow sphere (representing the distant star fields) rotating around a small solid sphere inside (modeling the Earth) produced exactly the same pattern of Coriolis and centrifugal forces that are claimed as proof of Earth's spinning in space. If the hollow shell of matter accelerates or rotates, any object inside the shell will tend to be carried along with the acceleration or rotation to some extent. There have arisen some questions re: the Lagrangian used by Barbour and Bertotti and also about the coordinate transformations discussed in their article, but the main experiment showed, quite clearly that Mach's Principle is correct.

http://www.freelists.org/post/geocentrism/Overview-Barbour-Bertotti

Ernst Mach proposed that it is the weight of the stars circling the Earth that drags Foucault pendulums around, creates Coriolis forces in the air that give the cyclones to our weather etc. Barbour and Bertotti (Il Nuovo Cimento 32B(1):1-27, 11 March 1977) proved that a hollow sphere (the universe) rotating around a solid sphere inside (the Earth) produced exactly the same results of Coriolis forces, dragging of Foucault pendulums etc. that are put forward as 'proofs' of heliocentricity!

Stationary Earth/Cloud Trajectories - Timelapse Videos

http://theflatearthsociety.net/talk/viewtopic.php?f=7&t=1143

When you have at your disposal the best possible information, everything becomes so easy to understand...no such thing as a heliocentric foucault's pendulum.
« Last Edit: May 25, 2010, 11:47:33 PM by levee »

?

#### Space Tourist

• 228
##### Re: The Foucault Pendulum...
« Reply #20 on: May 26, 2010, 02:57:34 AM »
Aluminum Pendulum now what?
cant be magnets becouse Alu isnt magnetic...

Accidentally or not, google Foucault currents.

Only works with high speeds with alu the weight would have to be spinning at high rpm think 1000+ RPM.
Oh and you can do this at home with any heavy weight and some string sooo yea..
Then you have provided evidence for the Earth being a sphere

#### Raebodep

• 87
##### Re: The Foucault Pendulum...
« Reply #21 on: May 26, 2010, 05:53:26 AM »
I highly doubt there is electromagnet that they can turn on and off and besides you can see it freely while NOT on tour and can get pretty close to it without touching it. So I'm sure I can go there when there isn't a tour and see if there is a magnet on or not.

Besides as stated before this can be easily reproduced at home.

Leeve show me the math that would make the Pendulum do move because of UA

Here is their math and if you aren't good at math then please give me the figures and I'll check it for you and see if it all plots out correctly. Trust me if there was something like this I'd love to believe in it I just need to check all the facts and math. Since Math is a universal language it shouldn't be that hard for anyone to understand and accept your theory.

Quote
\begin{align} F_{c,x} &= 2 m \Omega \dfrac{dy}{dt} \sin(\varphi)\\ F_{c,y} &= - 2 m \Omega \dfrac{dx}{dt} \sin(\varphi) \end{align}

where ? is the rotational frequency of Earth, Fc,x is the component of the Coriolis force in the x-direction and Fc,y is the component of the Coriolis force in the y-direction.

The restoring force, in the small angle approximation, is given by

\begin{align} F_{g,x} &= - m \omega^2 x \\ F_{g,y} &= - m \omega^2 y. \end{align}

Using Newton's laws of motion this leads to the system of equations

\begin{align} \dfrac{d^2x}{dt^2} &= -\omega^2 x + 2 \Omega \dfrac{dy}{dt} \sin(\varphi)\\ \dfrac{d^2y}{dt^2} &= -\omega^2 y - 2 \Omega \dfrac{dx}{dt} \sin(\varphi) \,. \end{align}

Switching to complex coordinates z = x + iy, the equations read

\frac{d^2z}{dt^2} + 2i\Omega \frac{dz}{dt} \sin(\varphi)+\omega^2 z=0 \,.

To first order in ?/? this equation has the solution

z=e^{-i\Omega \sin(\varphi) t}\left(c_1 e^{i\omega t}+c_2 e^{-i\omega t}\right) \,.

If we measure time in days, then ? = 2? and we see that the pendulum rotates by an angle of ?2??sin(?) during one day.
He didn't just wake up one morning and say "I wonder what shape the earth is".  Instead he woke up and said, "the earth looks flat, now how can I proved it".

#### markjo

• Content Nazi
• The Elder Ones
• 38908
##### Re: The Foucault Pendulum...
« Reply #22 on: May 26, 2010, 06:35:58 AM »
I highly doubt there is electromagnet that they can turn on and off and besides you can see it freely while NOT on tour and can get pretty close to it without touching it. So I'm sure I can go there when there isn't a tour and see if there is a magnet on or not.

Quote from: http://itotd.com/articles/362/foucaults-pendulum/
In order to show the movement of a pendulum over longer periods of time than inertia will provide—and to satisfy museum-going crowds—most modern exhibits of Foucault’s Pendulum, including the one in the Conservatoire, use an electromagnet under the floor or platform beneath the pendulum to give it a tiny extra boost as it swings past. When I first heard about the magnets, it sounded like cheating to me—the image I had in mind was of moving magnets that influenced the direction of the swing. But in fact the magnets are circular and simply pull the pendulum very slightly toward its vertical center just as it approaches the middle of each swing, so the direction of the swing is unaffected. That in itself, I think, is a very clever piece of engineering
Science is what happens when preconception meets verification.
Quote from: Robosteve
Besides, perhaps FET is a conspiracy too.
Quote from: bullhorn
It is just the way it is, you understanding it doesn't concern me.

?

#### trig

• 2240
##### Re: The Foucault Pendulum...
« Reply #23 on: May 26, 2010, 07:31:18 AM »
The Foucault Pendulum is a very simple experiment that can be made without the "Conspiracy's" intervention and with very limited expenses. You just need to get an interested school, or university, where a three story high space is available at no cost, and some schools and universities would even help with the rest of the costs. Using a little bit of negotiating skill, you can do this as a promotional activity for both the FES and the participating school.

Just as with other simple and inexpensive experiments, the people who have to do them are the "FE believers", since the position of the FES is coming closer and closer to total paranoia. Just remember how Parsifal is now saying that the ink in the printers and the charcoal in every burned stick are both intelligent enough and tampered by the Conspiracy.

I am satisfied with the reports I have heard in which the pendulum at our geographical institute, which is there for anyone to see, gives no detectable precedence to either clockwise or counterclockwise rotations because we are too close to the Equator to see them, just as real science predicts.

Since most of the FE theorists live in the USA or Europe, you can do the experiment and tell all of us the results, knowing that you saw for yourselves that there are no motors or magnets hidden inside the pendulum you make.

PS. You could have some kind of mechanism to give the pendulum a small push every now and then, or you can do this by hand, that is your choice. Since you are such paranoids, the second alternative is probably better.
« Last Edit: May 26, 2010, 07:40:17 AM by trig »

#### Raebodep

• 87
##### Re: The Foucault Pendulum...
« Reply #24 on: May 26, 2010, 07:36:03 AM »
I highly doubt there is electromagnet that they can turn on and off and besides you can see it freely while NOT on tour and can get pretty close to it without touching it. So I'm sure I can go there when there isn't a tour and see if there is a magnet on or not.

Quote from: http://itotd.com/articles/362/foucaults-pendulum/
In order to show the movement of a pendulum over longer periods of time than inertia will provide—and to satisfy museum-going crowds—most modern exhibits of Foucault’s Pendulum, including the one in the Conservatoire, use an electromagnet under the floor or platform beneath the pendulum to give it a tiny extra boost as it swings past. When I first heard about the magnets, it sounded like cheating to me—the image I had in mind was of moving magnets that influenced the direction of the swing. But in fact the magnets are circular and simply pull the pendulum very slightly toward its vertical center just as it approaches the middle of each swing, so the direction of the swing is unaffected. That in itself, I think, is a very clever piece of engineering

This can easily be tested at home which I can do if you'd like me to or hell I can even go to this library which is easily 5 stories high and test it out there. Without any external factors. Also I could replace it with plastic or some other object that isn't effect by magnets and still have the same weight and surface area as a metal one. Based on the math I would get the same results.

Also what about the South Pointing Chariot which is a compass not based on magnetic fields.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/South_Pointing_Chariot

Also I'd like to ask all FET believers to not attack concepts that are widely accept today. I wish you to DEFEND your concepts and properly explain them. Otherwise you will never convince me of your theory. Because it seems like your speculating on how to prove something wrong instead of trying to prove how it would work in your theory I mean I can to any lengths to say something is wrong but proving how it would work in my world is the hard part.
« Last Edit: May 26, 2010, 08:59:13 AM by Raebodep »
He didn't just wake up one morning and say "I wonder what shape the earth is".  Instead he woke up and said, "the earth looks flat, now how can I proved it".

?

#### trig

• 2240
##### Re: The Foucault Pendulum...
« Reply #25 on: May 26, 2010, 08:57:28 AM »
Also I'd like to ask all FET believers to not attack concepts that are widely accept today. I wish you to DEFEND your concepts and properly explain them. Otherwise you will never convince me of your theory. Because it seems like your speculating on how to prove something wrong stead of trying to prove how it would work in your theory I mean I can to any lengths to say something is wrong but proving how it would work in my world is the hard part.
You are asking way too much. The main defense of FE "theorists" against 400 years of accumulated science is the PUAGH defense: gravitation? PUAGH!!! navigation? PUAGH!!! maps? PUAGH!!! Cavendish? PUAGH!!! Foucault? PUAGH!!! Anything touched by our opposition is Conspiracy and is PUAGH!!!

Since there is no way they can put a science based attack, the remaining alternative is the emotional attack.

Now that I remember, O.J. Simpson got his ill-deserved freedom with the same defense: if there is anything unconvincing, anywhere in the prosecution's case, it is like a pizza with a rotten piece. You do not eat around it, you throw away the whole thing.
« Last Edit: May 26, 2010, 09:00:48 AM by trig »

#### markjo

• Content Nazi
• The Elder Ones
• 38908
##### Re: The Foucault Pendulum...
« Reply #26 on: May 26, 2010, 09:01:16 AM »
Also what about the South Pointing Chariot which is a compass not based on magnetic fields.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/South_Pointing_Chariot

Quote
The chariot is a two-wheeled vehicle upon which is a pointing figure connected to the wheels by means of differential gearing. Through careful selection of wheel size, track and gear ratios, the figure atop the chariot will always point in the same direction, hence acting as a non-magnetic compass vehicle.

So, what do you want to know about it?
Science is what happens when preconception meets verification.
Quote from: Robosteve
Besides, perhaps FET is a conspiracy too.
Quote from: bullhorn
It is just the way it is, you understanding it doesn't concern me.

#### Raebodep

• 87
##### Re: The Foucault Pendulum...
« Reply #27 on: May 26, 2010, 09:05:02 AM »
Also what about the South Pointing Chariot which is a compass not based on magnetic fields.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/South_Pointing_Chariot

Quote
The chariot is a two-wheeled vehicle upon which is a pointing figure connected to the wheels by means of differential gearing. Through careful selection of wheel size, track and gear ratios, the figure atop the chariot will always point in the same direction, hence acting as a non-magnetic compass vehicle.

So, what do you want to know about it?

I dunno I wrote that this morning and I was tired. It points south always with some line of longitude or latitude I forget what I was gonig to say ignore it. Lol
He didn't just wake up one morning and say "I wonder what shape the earth is".  Instead he woke up and said, "the earth looks flat, now how can I proved it".

#### parsec

• 6196
• 206,265
##### Re: The Foucault Pendulum...
« Reply #28 on: May 26, 2010, 09:49:59 AM »
Aluminum Pendulum now what?
cant be magnets becouse Alu isnt magnetic...

Accidentally or not, google Foucault currents.

Only works with high speeds with alu the weight would have to be spinning at high rpm think 1000+ RPM.
Oh and you can do this at home with any heavy weight and some string sooo yea..

No, it works pretty well at low speeds as well.

EDIT:
This thread had degenerated to blatant copypasta and personal unjustified opinions and I will not be posting anymore. OP should come back when he has some concrete evidence.
« Last Edit: May 26, 2010, 09:51:47 AM by parsec »

#### Raebodep

• 87
##### Re: The Foucault Pendulum...
« Reply #29 on: May 26, 2010, 10:03:40 AM »
Aluminum Pendulum now what?
cant be magnets becouse Alu isnt magnetic...

Accidentally or not, google Foucault currents.

Only works with high speeds with alu the weight would have to be spinning at high rpm think 1000+ RPM.
Oh and you can do this at home with any heavy weight and some string sooo yea..

No, it works pretty well at low speeds as well.

EDIT:
This thread had degenerated to blatant copypasta and personal unjustified opinions and I will not be posting anymore. OP should come back when he has some concrete evidence.

Which you have been doing as well! I AM NOT ASKING FOR YOU TO DISPROVE POPULAR THEORIES! I am asking you to tell me how this works in your flat Earth world an experiment that I can easily recreate at home or in a public place if allowed. I can use plastic and have nothing effect my magnets at all to create pendulum and it would still work.

Provide me MATH! There is math that allows a pendulum to work show me Math of how a Pendulum works in FET and you are done and have proved your point. All you have do to is through math is show me how the same movement of a Pendulum can be achieved in a FE universe. Then you are done. You can write out a long essay attack Round Earth Theories but this still does not explain how a Pendulum would work mathematically in your Flat Earth world.

You sir a a hypocrite for I have seen many FET believers using Copy Pasta many many many times on these forums and by saying you are leaving you have forfeit your right to post here and being accepted in this logical debate. I also wish you to no longer post her because you are acting childish when you are cornered logically and simply have a tempertanrum and refuse to remain civil.

Maybe if you apologize for your rude outburst we will accept you willing back into this thread until then all other post by you on this thread shall be considered NULL AND VOID by me and hopefully by others you sir have lost.

Once again I ask FET believers to tell me how a Pendulum would work in FET with math! Since we know how it works with math in a round Earth Universe. Please provide me with the answers as I wish to believe in FET.

Edit:
It also seems you've prooved Trigs. Puagh theory correct parsec. As someone who wishes to believe in FET I am ashamed of you and I think all other FET believers should be as well as you proved nonbeliever right in his typical view of a FET Believers.
« Last Edit: May 26, 2010, 10:12:05 AM by Raebodep »
He didn't just wake up one morning and say "I wonder what shape the earth is".  Instead he woke up and said, "the earth looks flat, now how can I proved it".