Pendulums.

  • 69 Replies
  • 12061 Views
Pendulums.
« on: October 05, 2011, 07:03:13 PM »
I dont think I spelled it right, but you get the idea. Unless the Flat Earth rotates, the pendelum proves it wrong.

For those that dont know what I am talking about, if you but a ball on a string, hung it on a sort of beam, started swinging it so it goes in one direction, then left a domino a little bit to the side of it, at some point the earths rotation will move its swinging path and it will knock over the domino.


Re: Pendulums.
« Reply #1 on: October 05, 2011, 10:35:51 PM »

Re: Pendulums.
« Reply #2 on: October 05, 2011, 11:05:05 PM »
You, sir, can't comprehend the idea of bottoms.

Re: Pendulums.
« Reply #3 on: October 05, 2011, 11:50:22 PM »
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brownian_motion

If the experiment were done in a vacuum the results would be the same.

...according to round earth theory. That's circular logic.

You need to actually do the experiment if you want to have valid reasoning.

Re: Pendulums.
« Reply #4 on: October 06, 2011, 02:12:25 AM »
Brownian motion concerns particles, not pendulums!

“The Earth looks flat, therefore it is” FEers wisdom.

Re: Pendulums.
« Reply #5 on: October 06, 2011, 03:41:57 AM »
Brownian motion is also random (or better: wholly unpredictable) whereas pendulums move in a very predictable way. That predicatable movement also varies with latitudie, proving a spherical Earth.

*

Ski

  • Planar Moderator
  • 8730
  • Homines, dum docent, dispenguin.
Re: Pendulums.
« Reply #6 on: October 06, 2011, 06:28:08 AM »
That is the first I've heard of a Brownian motion link with pendulums.

The commonly believed answer is that the pendulum is affected by the heavens.
"Never think you can turn over any old falsehood without a terrible squirming of the horrid little population that dwells under it." -O.W. Holmes "Truth forever on the scaffold, Wrong forever on the throne.."

?

Thork

Re: Pendulums.
« Reply #7 on: October 06, 2011, 06:39:28 AM »
Does the pendulum knock over the domino? I mean, its a nice thought experiment but your assumption is that it should do this and therefore it does. Just because you are told it works like that doesn't mean it does. You aren't going to be able to replicate this at home due to losses and your pendulum running out of steam, so I guess you only have their word for it. Things like grandfather clocks don't seem to want to swing the pendulum through the glass door at the front though. I would like a real world example of such a phenomenon.

Re: Pendulums.
« Reply #8 on: October 06, 2011, 07:37:06 AM »
Things like grandfather clocks don't seem to want to swing the pendulum through the glass door at the front though. I would like a real world example of such a phenomenon.

Clocks dont have pendulums that CAN swing out of alignment. They are hung on a shaft or through a slot that only allows them to swing in the correct path. also they ahve a very short cycle that is powered by falling weights. This means the pendulum itself is a regulating mechanism for keeping time, not a method of testing for free moving pendulum action on a round or flat earth.

you can do better than that. please talk about the issue the OP is asking. Also there are countles examples of the OP's point all over the internet. lrn2google lrn2youtube lrn2wikki
Your god was nailed to a cross. Mine carries a hammer...... any questions?

?

Thork

Re: Pendulums.
« Reply #9 on: October 06, 2011, 07:38:59 AM »
Please provide a real world example of a pendulum swinging off its axis.

Re: Pendulums.
« Reply #10 on: October 06, 2011, 07:48:53 AM »
Please provide a real world example of a pendulum swinging off its axis.

The Panthéon in Paris.

I've been to Paris personally. Both Paris and the pendulum exist.

*

markjo

  • Content Nazi
  • The Elder Ones
  • 41963
Re: Pendulums.
« Reply #11 on: October 06, 2011, 07:50:22 AM »
Please provide a real world example of a pendulum swinging off its axis.

Do you mean something like this?
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.

*

WardoggKC130FE

  • 11842
  • What website is that? MadeUpMonkeyShit.com?
Re: Pendulums.
« Reply #12 on: October 06, 2011, 07:51:30 AM »
I've been to Paris personally. Both Paris and the pendulum exist.

Do you have any proof to this outlandish claim?

Re: Pendulums.
« Reply #13 on: October 06, 2011, 07:54:34 AM »
http://www.calacademy.org/products/pendulum/index.html

It's a fun animated series of pages that even children can understand.

I'm sure you'll tell me that these things show no actual evidense or they make huge logical leaps that are wrong.

Here are the facts: People with far less technology and far less understanding of science and far less access to the great knowledge base of human kind were able to figure this stuff out with simple experiments like a pendulum. Focault figured it out with a 30" string and a weight.
« Last Edit: October 06, 2011, 07:56:46 AM by Sentient Pizza »
Your god was nailed to a cross. Mine carries a hammer...... any questions?

*

Ski

  • Planar Moderator
  • 8730
  • Homines, dum docent, dispenguin.
Re: Pendulums.
« Reply #14 on: October 06, 2011, 08:15:32 AM »
I've been to Paris personally. Both Paris and the pendulum exist.

To my mind, any result with a pendulum using electromagnets is suspect.
"Never think you can turn over any old falsehood without a terrible squirming of the horrid little population that dwells under it." -O.W. Holmes "Truth forever on the scaffold, Wrong forever on the throne.."

*

PizzaPlanet

  • 12257
  • Now available in stereo
Re: Pendulums.
« Reply #15 on: October 06, 2011, 08:28:35 AM »
Brownian motion concerns particles, not pendulums!
In fact, it also concerns drunken sailors earlý in the morning.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Random_walk
« Last Edit: October 06, 2011, 08:31:28 AM by PizzaPlanet »
hacking your precious forum as we speak 8) 8) 8)

Re: Pendulums.
« Reply #16 on: October 06, 2011, 12:25:49 PM »

To my mind, any result with a pendulum using electromagnets is suspect.

Indeed. Although the electromagnets are only there to maintain the pendulum's swing, they do add another element to the device. If you're using electromagnet to keep the pendulum swinging,  surely it'd be easy to get them to artificially recreate the Foucault effect.

Re: Pendulums.
« Reply #17 on: October 06, 2011, 12:53:14 PM »
Please provide a real world example of a pendulum swinging off its axis.

I completed such an experiment in my studies at Florida State University. Please look my experiment up, I give all the necessary data and credentials.
You, sir, can't comprehend the idea of bottoms.

?

The Knowledge

  • 2391
  • FE'ers don't do experiments. It costs too much.
Re: Pendulums.
« Reply #18 on: October 06, 2011, 12:54:55 PM »

To my mind, any result with a pendulum using electromagnets is suspect.

Indeed. Although the electromagnets are only there to maintain the pendulum's swing, they do add another element to the device. If you're using electromagnet to keep the pendulum swinging,  surely it'd be easy to get them to artificially recreate the Foucault effect.

Yes, and you'd need to deliberately set up the pendulum to fake the effect with no motive. And so would the science musem in London, and all the other museums that have Foucault pendulums. And you'd have to fake it in such a way that other people in the museum who work with and maintain the pendulum would not realise you had made this mechanism.  :P
Watermelon, Rhubarb Rhubarb, no one believes the Earth is Flat, Peas and Carrots,  walla.

Re: Pendulums.
« Reply #19 on: October 06, 2011, 12:57:21 PM »

To my mind, any result with a pendulum using electromagnets is suspect.

Indeed. Although the electromagnets are only there to maintain the pendulum's swing, they do add another element to the device. If you're using electromagnet to keep the pendulum swinging,  surely it'd be easy to get them to artificially recreate the Foucault effect.

My experiment used no such device. The only forces at work were gravity and the effects of the Earth's rotation.
You, sir, can't comprehend the idea of bottoms.

?

Crustinator

  • 7813
  • Bamhammer horror!
Re: Pendulums.
« Reply #20 on: October 06, 2011, 12:59:27 PM »
The earth tilts which causes tides and also pendulums.

?

Thork

Re: Pendulums.
« Reply #21 on: October 06, 2011, 01:01:47 PM »
Gyroscopes topple due to random precession. Its nothing to do with earth's shape. They need to be caged and re-erected. Pendulums moving off axis is a similar phenomenon. Its a combination of no system being perfect and chaos.

Re: Pendulums.
« Reply #22 on: October 06, 2011, 01:05:42 PM »
Gyroscopes topple due to random precession. Its nothing to do with earth's shape. They need to be caged and re-erected. Pendulums moving off axis is a similar phenomenon. Its a combination of no system being perfect and chaos.

If this were true, then the precession I measured would have been random. What I measured was a consistent precession that was extremely predictable. In fact, using the mathematics of RE, the precession observed matched completely with what was predicted.
« Last Edit: October 06, 2011, 02:30:03 PM by jraffield1 »
You, sir, can't comprehend the idea of bottoms.

?

Thork

Re: Pendulums.
« Reply #23 on: October 06, 2011, 01:14:21 PM »
If this were true, then the procession I measured would have been random. What I measured was a consistent procession that was extremely predictable. In fact, using the mathematics of RE, the procession observed matched completely with what was predicted.

Being as you can't even spell precession, I am now having doubts over the validity of your claims. A scientist would know the difference and not make repeated mistakes in the word's use. I am now left doubting your scientific credentials and am disappointed as I thought your work may be of use. :(

?

The Knowledge

  • 2391
  • FE'ers don't do experiments. It costs too much.
Re: Pendulums.
« Reply #24 on: October 06, 2011, 01:38:44 PM »
If this were true, then the procession I measured would have been random. What I measured was a consistent procession that was extremely predictable. In fact, using the mathematics of RE, the procession observed matched completely with what was predicted.

Being as you can't even spell precession, I am now having doubts over the validity of your claims. A scientist would know the difference and not make repeated mistakes in the word's use. I am now left doubting your scientific credentials and am disappointed as I thought your work may be of use. :(

Translation from Thorkspeak to English "I don't believe you and I have no other way to refute you than to say so."
Watermelon, Rhubarb Rhubarb, no one believes the Earth is Flat, Peas and Carrots,  walla.

?

Thork

Re: Pendulums.
« Reply #25 on: October 06, 2011, 01:45:20 PM »
Srsly? A guy makes a post and spells precession as procession 3 times and I am supposed to believe he did experiments and wrote papers on precession at university?

I know you think we are all idiots, but we didn't come down in the last shower. Its like MiG-Boy and his MiG-25 flight, or NASA scientists that visit or Antarctic scientists giving eye-witness accounts on this site. Its just kids pretending to try and make us squirm. The thing is, we know the earth is flat so we are already suspicious. If he had done that experiment he would have been on our side, as would MiG-Boy as would Neil Armstrong and Richard Branson and the SR-71 designer and all the other people we are lucky enough to have visit our site.

It may be we are indeed a very privileged bunch that all these people come visit us, but its more likely they are novice trolls.
« Last Edit: October 06, 2011, 01:47:07 PM by Thork »

Re: Pendulums.
« Reply #26 on: October 06, 2011, 02:22:22 PM »
If this were true, then the procession I measured would have been random. What I measured was a consistent procession that was extremely predictable. In fact, using the mathematics of RE, the procession observed matched completely with what was predicted.

Being as you can't even spell precession, I am now having doubts over the validity of your claims. A scientist would know the difference and not make repeated mistakes in the word's use. I am now left doubting your scientific credentials and am disappointed as I thought your work may be of use. :(

If you would like to discredit my results, refer to my experiment and data. Whether I misplaced a vowel does not invalidate my claims. Try again.
You, sir, can't comprehend the idea of bottoms.

Re: Pendulums.
« Reply #27 on: October 06, 2011, 02:26:04 PM »
Srsly? A guy makes a post and spells precession as procession 3 times and I am supposed to believe he did experiments and wrote papers on precession at university?

In a similar manner, I must discard everything you have posted or will post because you are apparently incapable of spelling the world "seriously."
You, sir, can't comprehend the idea of bottoms.

?

Thork

Re: Pendulums.
« Reply #28 on: October 06, 2011, 02:27:21 PM »
Srsly? A guy makes a post and spells precession as procession 3 times and I am supposed to believe he did experiments and wrote papers on precession at university?

In a similar manner, I must discard everything you have posted or will post because you are apparently incapable of spelling the world "seriously."
Does anyone on here tonight know how to use the internet?
http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=srsly

*

Son of Orospu

  • Jura's b*tch and proud of it!
  • Planar Moderator
  • 37834
  • I have artificial intelligence
Re: Pendulums.
« Reply #29 on: October 06, 2011, 05:14:28 PM »
Srsly? A guy makes a post and spells precession as procession 3 times and I am supposed to believe he did experiments and wrote papers on precession at university?

In a similar manner, I must discard everything you have posted or will post because you are apparently incapable of spelling the world "seriously."
Does anyone on here tonight know how to use the internet?
http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=srsly

Thork, thanks for the link.  I particularly liked the 4th definition in your link.

Quote
4.  srsly  225 up, 200 down
 Srsly is an internet shorthand or slang for seriously. It is either written out of laziness, a complete inability to spell or type, or in a failed attempt to be amusing. 

Which one of those discribes your use of this spelling?