Google Doodle - 9/18 - Foucault Pendulum

Sure but you are ignoring the fact that Foucault's pendulum works in the opposite direction in the southern hemisphere. Not possible on a plane.

The moon causes that, due to tidal gravitation.

Quote from: rottingroom on September 18, 2013, 11:16:09 AM

Sure but you are ignoring the fact that Foucault's pendulum works in the opposite direction in the southern hemisphere. Not possible on a plane.

The moon causes that, due to tidal gravitation.

So selective gravity again?

Poor Earth, she's so left out. Or maybe you are fine with gravity and are ignoring it's sphere making properties? Or, it's an infinite plane, I don't know.

If the pendulum and star rotation could both be caused by rotation and if going to the southern hemisphere produces nearly similar affects for two unrelated phenomena (one being inertia and the other being just the apparent movement of stars) then isn't this a great explanation?

Listen to how Rushy changes his position every time and how short his replies are. I doubt that he's really into a debate here.

Spheres are not the only shape capable of rotation.

... Not possible on a plane.

The moon causes that, due to tidal gravitation.

So selective gravity again?

A scientist speaks to a student, the scientist says "silver displays anti-bacterial properties, but helium does not" and the student replies "so selective atoms again?" in a childish sarcastic accent.

If the pendulum and star rotation could both be caused by rotation and if going to the southern hemisphere produces nearly similar affects for two unrelated phenomena (one being inertia and the other being just the apparent movement of stars) then isn't this a great explanation?

If you take the pendulum experiment wholly unto itself, yes, but we don't live on an island of one experiment. FET is a theory, not a single hypothesis.

Quote from: rottingroom on September 18, 2013, 11:32:30 AM

So selective gravity again?

A scientist speaks to a student, the scientist says "silver displays anti-bacterial properties, but helium does not" and the student replies "so selective atoms again?" in a childish sarcastic accent.

[/quote]

Are you implying there are different varieties of gravity that all coexist and display different properties based on some variation in how it is manifested?  That is what I am gathering from your analogy.  Please correct any misconceptions I may have.

Quote from: rottingroom on September 18, 2013, 11:32:30 AM

So selective gravity again?

A scientist speaks to a student, the scientist says "silver displays anti-bacterial properties, but helium does not" and the student replies "so selective atoms again?" in a childish sarcastic accent.

Stunning, after all why should I assume that there is gravity on earth? Just because there is gravity elsewhere shouldn't mean it's here, right? However, apparently there is some force here on earth that does fit that description.

... and your logic is, let's assume there is gravity everywhere else except the place where we can observe the described properties first hand?

We're both assuming, but only one of us is backing their assumptions up with observations.

Also, your atoms example is a great analogy until you realize that atoms can be demonstrated to have selective properties.

Quote from: rottingroom

If the pendulum and star rotation could both be caused by rotation and if going to the southern hemisphere produces nearly similar affects for two unrelated phenomena (one being inertia and the other being just the apparent movement of stars) then isn't this a great explanation?

If you take the pendulum experiment wholly unto itself, yes, but we don't live on an island of one experiment. FET is a theory, not a single hypothesis.

One experiment? There are 100's of ways to demonstrate Coriolis. Similarly there are many ways to demonstrate rotating stars but the explanation is the same: A spinning ball.

How many ways does FET have to demonstrate Coriolis causing this in the northern hemisphere while tides cause it in the south, as you put it?

Quote from: rottingroom on September 18, 2013, 05:30:05 AM

Quote from: squevil on September 18, 2013, 05:24:55 AM

Some would say AWT accounts for it.

Doesn't the precise oscillation rate as observed at different latitudes mean anything to FE'rs? Just put 2 + 2 together.

FErs haven't graduated from 1+1 addition yet; don't rush them!!

I don't know whether you are referring to the fact 1+1 = 1 has been proven true given proper circumstance or not? It is true REers have to reconcile that reality and have previously displayed difficulty doing as such. Carry on...     

Quote from: FlatOrange on September 18, 2013, 10:12:44 AM

Quote from: rottingroom on September 18, 2013, 05:30:05 AM

Quote from: squevil on September 18, 2013, 05:24:55 AM

Some would say AWT accounts for it.

Doesn't the precise oscillation rate as observed at different latitudes mean anything to FE'rs? Just put 2 + 2 together.

FErs haven't graduated from 1+1 addition yet; don't rush them!!

I don't know whether you are referring to the fact 1+1 = 1 has been proven true given proper circumstance or not? It is true REers have to reconcile that reality and have previously displayed difficulty doing as such. Carry on...     

The reality that 1+1=1 huh?

In any case, I extend all arguments.

How is it that Foucault's pendulum is affected by Earth's supposed spinning but NOTHING ELSE IS?  I thought the effect wasn't noticeable because everything spins with the Earth.  HAHAHA!

How is it that Foucault's pendulum is affected by Earth's supposed spinning but NOTHING ELSE IS?  I thought the effect wasn't noticeable because everything spins with the Earth.  HAHAHA!

Is it not obvious that this is a relatively weak force? Any other force would completely take the pendulum off track. Just as tropical cyclone is free to deflect to the right when there is not another force to stop it as its dissipation begins. As newton said,  "When viewed in an inertial reference frame, an object either is at rest or moves at a constant velocity, unless acted upon by an external force."

How is it that Foucault's pendulum is affected by Earth's supposed spinning but NOTHING ELSE IS?  I thought the effect wasn't noticeable because everything spins with the Earth.  HAHAHA!

Are you talking about the 1,000 mph wind which you expect to feel due to the rotation of the earth? The slow rotation of a Foucault pendulum is not due to wind, it's due to the Coriolis effect. There are other things which are affected by the Coriolis effect like the trajectories of very long-range artillery shells or sniper bullets.

Stunning, after all why should I assume that there is gravity on earth? Just because there is gravity elsewhere shouldn't mean it's here, right?

Actually, it's the other way around.  Since no one has been to the moon, or any other celestial object, then that means that no one has confirmed that celestial gravitation exists.  If it is known that gravity does not exist on earth, what reason does anyone have to assume that it does exist anywhere else in the universe?

Quote from: EarthIsASpaceship on September 18, 2013, 05:46:47 PM

How is it that Foucault's pendulum is affected by Earth's supposed spinning but NOTHING ELSE IS?  I thought the effect wasn't noticeable because everything spins with the Earth.  HAHAHA!

Are you talking about the 1,000 mph wind which you expect to feel due to the rotation of the earth? The slow rotation of a Foucault pendulum is not due to wind, it's due to the Coriolis effect. There are other things which are affected by the Coriolis effect like the trajectories of very long-range artillery shells or sniper bullets.

If FP was affected by the Earth's spin, everything else would be too.  Why don't we see swings on swingsets moving in circles and tires hanging from trees moving in circles and my bird feeder moving in a circle?

Quote from: Cartesian on September 19, 2013, 01:59:07 AM

Quote from: EarthIsASpaceship on September 18, 2013, 05:46:47 PM

How is it that Foucault's pendulum is affected by Earth's supposed spinning but NOTHING ELSE IS?  I thought the effect wasn't noticeable because everything spins with the Earth.  HAHAHA!

Are you talking about the 1,000 mph wind which you expect to feel due to the rotation of the earth? The slow rotation of a Foucault pendulum is not due to wind, it's due to the Coriolis effect. There are other things which are affected by the Coriolis effect like the trajectories of very long-range artillery shells or sniper bullets.

If FP was affected by the Earth's spin, everything else would be too.  Why don't we see swings on swingsets moving in circles and tires hanging from trees moving in circles and my bird feeder moving in a circle?

Because FP has such low friction that it isn't affected by other forces as much. FP requires a thin long string to be attached to a high ceiling to work. The idea of the experiment is to remove forces that would otherwise cause the string to be affected by other forces.

In addition to Rottingroom's good points it takes 24 hours for a FP to complete a circle. There is no reason why it would be evident in system's that, as Rottinroom pointed out, are susceptible to a large number if other influences.

I suspect that mathematically, they figured out how long the cable should be and at what distance the ball should be swung at in order to get the right momentum for it to continue moving for 24 hrs.  They DO initially move it, don't they?  It doesn't just start moving on it's own.

http://www.brown.edu/Departments/Italian_Studies/n2k/visibility/Alison_Errico/Soft%20Moon/pendulum.html

Gives one method of starting a pendulum swinging. Feel free to research your own!

I suspect that mathematically, they figured out how long the cable should be and at what distance the ball should be swung at in order to get the right momentum for it to continue moving for 24 hrs.  They DO initially move it, don't they?  It doesn't just start moving on it's own.

It isn't always 24 hours. It is entirely dependent on the latitude.

Of course they initially move it, Coriolis' effects need some momentum to be seen.

For instance a sniper bullet dropped wouldn't have any noticeable Coriolis effect but one with momentum can be seen to move due to Coriolis.

A hurricane is another momentous object with low friction that is seen to be affected by it.

Quote from: EarthIsASpaceship on September 21, 2013, 08:58:47 AM

I suspect that mathematically, they figured out how long the cable should be and at what distance the ball should be swung at in order to get the right momentum for it to continue moving for 24 hrs.  They DO initially move it, don't they?  It doesn't just start moving on it's own.

It isn't always 24 hours. It is entirely dependent on the latitude.

Of course they initially move it, Coriolis' effects need some momentum to be seen.

For instance a sniper bullet dropped wouldn't have any noticeable Coriolis effect but one with momentum can be seen to move due to Coriolis.

A hurricane is another momentous object with low friction that is seen to be affected by it.

Hurricanes have nothing to do with the Earth spinning.   That's another really bad scientific conclusion or just another lie.  They spin in opposite hemi"spheres" because of the heat generated as the sun travels through the Equinox.  Air moves in opposite directions just like it does behind a jet plane.  The fact is, Coriolis is an effect caused by a force upon it, from ANY direction.  It is not definitive proof that the Earth spins.

Quote from: rottingroom on September 21, 2013, 09:04:20 AM

Quote from: EarthIsASpaceship on September 21, 2013, 08:58:47 AM

I suspect that mathematically, they figured out how long the cable should be and at what distance the ball should be swung at in order to get the right momentum for it to continue moving for 24 hrs.  They DO initially move it, don't they?  It doesn't just start moving on it's own.

It isn't always 24 hours. It is entirely dependent on the latitude.

Of course they initially move it, Coriolis' effects need some momentum to be seen.

For instance a sniper bullet dropped wouldn't have any noticeable Coriolis effect but one with momentum can be seen to move due to Coriolis.

A hurricane is another momentous object with low friction that is seen to be affected by it.

Hurricanes have nothing to do with the Earth spinning.   That's another really bad scientific conclusion or just another lie.  They spin in opposite hemi"spheres" because of the heat generated as the sun travels through the Equinox.  Air moves in opposite directions just like it does behind a jet plane.  The fact is, Coriolis is an effect caused by a force upon it, from ANY direction.  It is not definitive proof that the Earth spins.

The strong rotating winds of a tropical cyclone are a result of the (partial) conservation of angular momentum imparted by the Earth's rotation as air flows inwards toward the axis of rotation. As a result, they rarely form within 5° of the equator.[1] Tropical cyclones are typically between 100 and 4,000 km (62 and 2,500 mi) in diameter.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tropical_cyclone if you'd like to read more.

Of course Wikipedia is going to say they are caused by Earth's rotation.  It's the accepted mainstream model.

Quote from: rottingroom on September 21, 2013, 09:04:20 AM

Quote from: EarthIsASpaceship on September 21, 2013, 08:58:47 AM

I suspect that mathematically, they figured out how long the cable should be and at what distance the ball should be swung at in order to get the right momentum for it to continue moving for 24 hrs.  They DO initially move it, don't they?  It doesn't just start moving on it's own.

It isn't always 24 hours. It is entirely dependent on the latitude.

Of course they initially move it, Coriolis' effects need some momentum to be seen.

For instance a sniper bullet dropped wouldn't have any noticeable Coriolis effect but one with momentum can be seen to move due to Coriolis.

A hurricane is another momentous object with low friction that is seen to be affected by it.

Hurricanes have nothing to do with the Earth spinning.   That's another really bad scientific conclusion or just another lie.  They spin in opposite hemi"spheres" because of the heat generated as the sun travels through the Equinox.  Air moves in opposite directions just like it does behind a jet plane.  The fact is, Coriolis is an effect caused by a force upon it, from ANY direction.  It is not definitive proof that the Earth spins.

Well that certainly does not work. The sun is only above the equator during fall and spring. During summer the sun is over the northern hemisphere and during winter it is over the south. The coriolis effect always causes cyclone rotation to occur over the equator. Its safe to say that we can rule out the sun being the cause of this effect.

Well there you go, you said it yourself.  When the sun is in the Northern hemisphere, hurricanes spin in one direction and when the sun is in the Southern hemisphere, hurricanes spin the opposite direction.

Well there you go, you said it yourself.  When the sun is in the Northern hemisphere, hurricanes spin in one direction and when the sun is in the Southern hemisphere, hurricanes spin the opposite direction.

No you are incorrect. Can you please try to have a real discussion? The coriolis effect has rotations going in opposite directions. The dividing line is always the equator. Therefore it is not caused by the sun. Comprehension, aka some basic reading skills would help you a lot.

Well there you go, you said it yourself.  When the sun is in the Northern hemisphere, hurricanes spin in one direction and when the sun is in the Southern hemisphere, hurricanes spin the opposite direction.

Typical you to result to cutdowns and sarcasm. Please read the BOLD print above. Yes they are caused by the sun...changing the temperature of the atmosphere.

Quote from: EarthIsASpaceship on September 22, 2013, 02:35:50 PM

Well there you go, you said it yourself.  When the sun is in the Northern hemisphere, hurricanes spin in one direction and when the sun is in the Southern hemisphere, hurricanes spin the opposite direction.

Typical you to result to cutdowns and sarcasm. Please read the BOLD print above. Yes they are caused by the sun...changing the temperature of the atmosphere.

I did it because you obviously didn't understand a word. Nor do you have a clue where cyclonic and anti-cyclonic rotations occur. The sun is in the southern hemisphere in the winter and the north in the summer, yet these opposite rotations happen on opposite sides of the equator year round. Therefore, it has nothing to do with the sun. This is what I already said and yet you wanted to try and say that I was admitting you were right! This led me to believe that you can't read properly.

rottingroom, stop it with the personal attacks in the upper fora.  Consider this a warning.

When the sun is in the Northern hemisphere, hurricanes spin in one direction and when the sun is in the Southern hemisphere, hurricanes spin the opposite direction.

If you are that certain with your claim then I am sure you are able to provide us with two aerial photos of hurricanes taken from the same hemisphere showing two different spinning direction. It has to be from the same hemisphere. We also need to see the source of your pictures just to verify that both pictures are indeed from the same hemisphere.

I guess I should've been clearer.  I didn't mean they spin opposites directions in the same hemisphere.  I meant they spin in opposite directions in opposite hemispheres only because the sun MOVES closer to one hemisphere than the other, depending on the season.  The weather channel is always saying "hurricane season" so naturally, I figured they only occur in the given hemisphere at the given season.  Am I wrong?

I guess I should've been clearer.  I didn't mean they spin opposites directions in the same hemisphere.  I meant they spin in opposite directions in opposite hemispheres only because the sun MOVES closer to one hemisphere than the other, depending on the season.  The weather channel is always saying "hurricane season" so naturally, I figured they only occur in the given hemisphere at the given season.  Am I wrong?

Cyclone development is dependent on the temperature of water, yes. They develop all year along the equator, but as far as N. America is concerned, those same cyclone's usually only reach our coasts during the summer months because it is during that time that it is warm enough for those cyclone's to be sustained. During the winter, they still develop near the equator and work their way up toward our east coast but  simply dissipate before ever reaching land.