Foucault pendulums

  • 826 Replies
  • 72805 Views
*

Rama Set

  • 6877
  • I am also an engineer
Re: Foucault pendulums
« Reply #270 on: May 28, 2014, 05:01:14 PM »
Vauxhall, I sincerely hope you are not trying to say that all Foucault's pendulums are conspiring against you.
Aether is the  characteristic of action or inaction of charged  & noncharged particals.

*

Vauxhall

  • 5914
  • dark matter does not exist
Re: Foucault pendulums
« Reply #271 on: May 28, 2014, 05:02:05 PM »
Vauxhall, I sincerely hope you are not trying to say that all Foucault's pendulums are conspiring against you.

Against me? No.
Against you? Yes.
Read the FAQS.

*

Rama Set

  • 6877
  • I am also an engineer
Re: Foucault pendulums
« Reply #272 on: May 28, 2014, 05:08:26 PM »
Vauxhall, I sincerely hope you are not trying to say that all Foucault's pendulums are conspiring against you.

Against me? No.
Against you? Yes.

Fascinating. NASA's doing or wut?  And how did Foucault pull off the trick?
Aether is the  characteristic of action or inaction of charged  & noncharged particals.

Re: Foucault pendulums
« Reply #273 on: May 28, 2014, 05:23:59 PM »
Did anyone besides Shmeggley even watch the video I posted?

Vauxhall?  Was it faked?

*

Goddamnit, Clown

  • 824
  • How else would light work?
Re: Foucault pendulums
« Reply #274 on: May 28, 2014, 05:29:14 PM »
Sure, I enjoyed it, but it turns out that there is literally no evidence Vauxhall will accept. Any pendulum could have hidden magnets or wires or a tiny propeller on the far side or whatever, so I doubt your video will be received any differently.
Big Pendulum have their tentacles everywhere.

*

Vauxhall

  • 5914
  • dark matter does not exist
Re: Foucault pendulums
« Reply #275 on: May 28, 2014, 05:38:41 PM »
I will accept your theories once you prove that Foucault Pendulums are not controlled by magnets, wires, motors, or propellers. Until then, absolutely not. You guys have yet to provide any evidence of a real working Foucault Pendulum. All of the examples given in this thread are second-hand stories and wikipedia articles... I'm sorry, but that doesn't cut it. You all are a damn scourge on the scientific community as a whole.

"It works" is what everything you say amounts to. Sure it works, but why? How? Proof, please. We have given you ample evidence that pendulums could work several other ways, you haven't been able to refute any of them... You have actually said that "it's possible" that they are controlled by magnets, motors, etc. So if it's possible, why isn't that the case?
« Last Edit: May 28, 2014, 05:45:47 PM by Vauxhall »
Read the FAQS.

*

Rama Set

  • 6877
  • I am also an engineer
Re: Foucault pendulums
« Reply #276 on: May 28, 2014, 05:42:22 PM »
I will accept your theories once you prove that Foucault Pendulums are not controlled by magnets, wires, motors, or propellers. Until then, absolutely not. You guys have yet to provide any evidence of a real working Foucault Pendulum. All of the examples given in this thread are second-hand stories and wikipedia articles... I'm sorry, but that doesn't cut it. You all are a damn scourge on scientific community as a whole.

Turns out the scientific community accepts Foucault's pendulum, so I am not sure that your hyperbole is on point.
Aether is the  characteristic of action or inaction of charged  & noncharged particals.

*

Goddamnit, Clown

  • 824
  • How else would light work?
Re: Foucault pendulums
« Reply #277 on: May 28, 2014, 06:08:09 PM »
Ah. The foundation of all conspiracy theories and religions:

I might be right, so until you prove otherwise, I definitely am  ::)

The balance of evidence is that innumerable people around the world independently create Foucault pendulums with little motive to fake their results or publish them on the internet. Youtube alone is full of examples of individuals, students and other unaffiliated folks making their own and freely sharing their results.

You can choose to say that every single one of them independently set up a far more complicated magnet-based fraud-machine, but not even you are suggesting there's any evidence of any magnets, you just want their results to be invalid, so you're choosing whatever might make them that way and saying that it must be the case.

Or, short version from the other direction: Can you think of a Foucault pendulum experiment that would satisfy you?
Big Pendulum have their tentacles everywhere.

*

RealScientist

  • 417
  • Science does not care for Earth's shape
Re: Foucault pendulums
« Reply #278 on: May 28, 2014, 06:16:13 PM »
Sure, I enjoyed it, but it turns out that there is literally no evidence Vauxhall will accept. Any pendulum could have hidden magnets or wires or a tiny propeller on the far side or whatever, so I doubt your video will be received any differently.

I was waiting to see how long it takes for a group of non-engineers to figure out the downfall of Vauxhall's claim. The magnets that Vauxhall believes the base has hidden are electromagnets the same size of those in an MRI machine. Guests would have to be searched with metal detectors and even the shoes with metal nails or metallic ornaments would have to be removed.

And not only that: a hugely powerful computer would be needed to calculate the strength of every magnet every second, the switching devices would make noise, the sensors needed to feed the location of the pendulum back to the computed would be in plain sight.

And just in case you have money for all of this, a small error would make the magnets rip the pendulum from the ceiling. Even a small error would be quite noticeable because every time the pendulum gets too close to a magnet it will jump. And the magnets would also create rotating torques in the pendulum.

In conclusion, nothing works in Vauxhall's supposed trick pendulum.

?

Scintific Method

  • 1448
  • Trust, but verify.
Re: Foucault pendulums
« Reply #279 on: May 28, 2014, 06:36:24 PM »
All of these ideas as to how to fake it and whatever, but how was it faked in 1851? No electronics, no fancy tricks, just a pendulum swinging on a pivot that everyone could come and watch as it precessed at a rate of 11° per hour.

Oh, and then there's this:

Sure, I enjoyed it, but it turns out that there is literally no evidence Vauxhall will accept. Any pendulum could have hidden magnets or wires or a tiny propeller on the far side or whatever, so I doubt your video will be received any differently.

I was waiting to see how long it takes for a group of non-engineers to figure out the downfall of Vauxhall's claim. The magnets that Vauxhall believes the base has hidden are electromagnets the same size of those in an MRI machine. Guests would have to be searched with metal detectors and even the shoes with metal nails or metallic ornaments would have to be removed.

And not only that: a hugely powerful computer would be needed to calculate the strength of every magnet every second, the switching devices would make noise, the sensors needed to feed the location of the pendulum back to the computed would be in plain sight.

And just in case you have money for all of this, a small error would make the magnets rip the pendulum from the ceiling. Even a small error would be quite noticeable because every time the pendulum gets too close to a magnet it will jump. And the magnets would also create rotating torques in the pendulum.

In conclusion, nothing works in Vauxhall's supposed trick pendulum.
Quote from: jtelroy
...the FE'ers still found a way to deny it. Not with counter arguments. Not with proof of any kind. By simply denying it.

"Better to keep your mouth shut and be thought a fool, than to open it and remove all doubt."

?

Shmeggley

  • 1909
  • Eppur si muove!
Re: Foucault pendulums
« Reply #280 on: May 28, 2014, 07:52:41 PM »
That's because I believe his account was deleted and wiped from the internet by agents of the conspiracy. They aren't going to leave a record of it.

At least you all are now accepting that a pendulum's motion can easily be manipulated by outside forces to create the illusion that the Earth is roatitng. That's all I wanted to hear.

Easily? Not that I can tell. With a pendulum like in your example, I can't find any way to swing its plane of motion by manipulating the string. I set up a little system, just a hex nut hanging from a thread. Twisting the string does nothing, it just makes the nut spin, but it still swings straight. Winding up the string makes it swing faster, letting it out it swings slower. Jiggling it sideways makes it swing in a narrow ellipse instead of straight back and forth. What else is there? I can't see how to do it.

I don't have strong magnets to try, but it seems to me that if they affect the pendulum at all, it's just going to pull the path into that ellipse shape. That's why those details you posted aren't so helpful.
« Last Edit: May 29, 2014, 07:29:34 AM by Shmeggley »
Giess what? I am a tin foil hat conspiracy lunatic who knows nothing... See what I'm getting at here?

*

ausGeoff

  • 6091
Re: Foucault pendulums
« Reply #281 on: May 28, 2014, 10:49:17 PM »

So Vauxhall seems to believe that Léon Foucault used a hiddden electric motor to defraud scientists the world over with the motor—distorting the path of a pendulum?  This was in 1851.

But... Nikola Tesla invented and patented the first practical AC motor in 1887.  And... Frank Julian Sprague invented the first practical DC motor In 1886.

I'd be interested to see how Vauxhall accounts for this 35-year time discrepancy. 

I'd also be interested in Vauxhall'd detailed explanation of exactly how an electric motor is utilised to maintain the consistent plane of the pendulum's arc of movement.  Thus far all he's shown us is a primary school kid's sketch showing a (hidden) motor above the ceiling from which the pendulum is attached.  Obviously we need a far more detailed "explanation" of the mechanics of this purported scientific fraud.
 

 

*

Vauxhall

  • 5914
  • dark matter does not exist
Re: Foucault pendulums
« Reply #282 on: May 28, 2014, 11:49:49 PM »
Geoff, I'm sorry but you're incorrect.

Here's a little lesson on electromagnetism: the unity of electric and magnetic phenomena is due to Hans Christian Ørsted and André-Marie Ampère in 1819; Michael Faraday invented the electric motor in 1821, and Georg Ohm mathematically analysed the electrical circuit in 1827.

This means that Léon Foucault, who "invented" the Foucault Pendulum in 1851, could have easily used an electric motor to power his fraudulent pendulum machine. It is honestly nothing but round Earth progopanda, that's what it amounts to. There are dozens of independent researchers who back my claim.
Read the FAQS.

Re: Foucault pendulums
« Reply #283 on: May 29, 2014, 12:35:52 AM »
Geoff, I'm sorry but you're incorrect.

Here's a little lesson on electromagnetism: the unity of electric and magnetic phenomena is due to Hans Christian Ørsted and André-Marie Ampère in 1819; Michael Faraday invented the electric motor in 1821, and Georg Ohm mathematically analysed the electrical circuit in 1827.

This means that Léon Foucault, who "invented" the Foucault Pendulum in 1851, could have easily used an electric motor to power his fraudulent pendulum machine. It is honestly nothing but round Earth progopanda, that's what it amounts to. There are dozens of independent researchers who back my claim.
Please list the researchers.

*

ausGeoff

  • 6091
Re: Foucault pendulums
« Reply #284 on: May 29, 2014, 01:16:42 AM »
There are dozens of independent researchers who back my claim.

I'm guessing that you may have not noticed and understood why I bolded the word practical in both my examples of the introduction of electric motors.  It's critical to this discussion.  There's a vast difference between theorising about electric motors and their potential application in the real world, and actually constructing a motor that works efficiently in the real world.

At any rate Faraday didn't "invent" any practical electric motor in 1821.  This is an image of one of his "motors" from the 1830s:




And this is an example of one of the first practical applications of an electric motor from 1898:
 

 
I also can't think of any logical reason why Foucault would've even considered for a moment defrauding the wider public with a display of his pendulum.  150 years ago there were no government grants to researchers, and there's obviously no way that the Foucault pendulum could be put to any practical use in order to make Foucault a rich man.


In the 15th century, through to the 20th century, science and scientists themselves were driven by a "need to know", rather than any interests in making scientists potentially wealthy.  And this need to know is the very thing that's enabling us to have this discussion from opposite sides of the world.
 
 

*

DonaldC

  • 194
  • Physics & Philosophy guy, teach science in China
Re: Foucault pendulums
« Reply #285 on: May 29, 2014, 02:29:47 AM »
Been a couple of years since I have posted. I just began lurking about again. In deference to Vaux
http://www.eti.kit.edu/english/1376.php   A quick history of electric motors. As Geoff pointed out he is discussing practical ones. In either case you need to have the motor turn the pendulum's direction at less than one rev per day. I will concede the point that for the original case it certainly could have been a guy up there in the rafters. However as also been duly noted by Geoff what you get if you attempt it is a rotating bob, not a change in the plane of motion of the pendulum.

It is entirely possible that your friend Vaux placed some magnets around his pendulum and then you saw the motion we normally see with a FP. Did you attempt it also without the magnets? I am guessing not, so you did not realize they had no effect.

In addition to the FPs in science centers all over the world High school kids and college kids rig up FPs all over the world each year. Your conspiracy requires all of them to be in on it. Or at least the teachers to somehow hoodwink all the kids. So all those teachers at least need to be in on it. Do you really believe this is the case?
[I can get onto the site to post only from work for some reason. At home I cannot so I am not avoiding the conversation if I do not respond quickly. I hope to have this resolved soon.]   
« Last Edit: May 29, 2014, 02:34:39 AM by DonaldC »
"Think of the average person. Now remember how stupid he is. Now realize half of them are dumber than that." George Carlin

Re: Foucault pendulums
« Reply #286 on: May 29, 2014, 03:52:09 AM »
No motors used LOL It won't spin on its own for 24 hour ,so its just a summation, because you have to start its swinging again in that 24 hour period ::). You can see why wankers like this guy swallow the crap, He cant remember which way the earth is suppose to spin. How would you be having him for your teacher. Not only is he teaching shyt ,he cant even remember his shyt LOL   " class="bbc_link" target="_blank">
« Last Edit: May 29, 2014, 03:56:33 AM by charles bloomington »
When it comes to Jane's standards .I'm lower then an old stove she has in her garage.
Shannon Noll and Natalie Bassingthwaighte - Don't…:

*

RealScientist

  • 417
  • Science does not care for Earth's shape
Re: Foucault pendulums
« Reply #287 on: May 29, 2014, 05:18:45 AM »
Geoff, I'm sorry but you're incorrect.

Here's a little lesson on electromagnetism: the unity of electric and magnetic phenomena is due to Hans Christian Ørsted and André-Marie Ampère in 1819; Michael Faraday invented the electric motor in 1821, and Georg Ohm mathematically analysed the electrical circuit in 1827.

This means that Léon Foucault, who "invented" the Foucault Pendulum in 1851, could have easily used an electric motor to power his fraudulent pendulum machine. It is honestly nothing but round Earth progopanda, that's what it amounts to. There are dozens of independent researchers who back my claim.

While the first steps towards the invention of the electric motors we now have were given in the 1820's, it is totally ridiculous to say we had the kind of motors required in this thread anytime before the 1950's, and that is being very generous.

You cannot imagine the frustration that comes with robotics due to the lack of really good, controllable motors. Either the motors are too big, or too heavy, or not powerful enough to do what you want to do. Until recently we had to use hydraulic actuators instead of electric motors for many so called "robots" because of the power to weight ratio of electric motors, and that meant that by your neat little robotic arm you would have a fridge-sized, ugly, noisy, stinking hydraulic liquid compressor.

There is a reason why Vauxhall's diagram has a motor that is totally disconnected from the pendulum it is supposed to manipulate. Vauxhall would not know where to start designing it. I have experience in Robotics and I would not know where to start.

Re: Foucault pendulums
« Reply #288 on: May 29, 2014, 06:04:46 AM »
Geoff, I'm sorry but you're incorrect.

Here's a little lesson on electromagnetism: the unity of electric and magnetic phenomena is due to Hans Christian Ørsted and André-Marie Ampère in 1819; Michael Faraday invented the electric motor in 1821, and Georg Ohm mathematically analysed the electrical circuit in 1827.

This means that Léon Foucault, who "invented" the Foucault Pendulum in 1851, could have easily used an electric motor to power his fraudulent pendulum machine. It is honestly nothing but round Earth progopanda, that's what it amounts to. There are dozens of independent researchers who back my claim.

While the first steps towards the invention of the electric motors we now have were given in the 1820's, it is totally ridiculous to say we had the kind of motors required in this thread anytime before the 1950's, and that is being very generous.

You cannot imagine the frustration that comes with robotics due to the lack of really good, controllable motors. Either the motors are too big, or too heavy, or not powerful enough to do what you want to do. Until recently we had to use hydraulic actuators instead of electric motors for many so called "robots" because of the power to weight ratio of electric motors, and that meant that by your neat little robotic arm you would have a fridge-sized, ugly, noisy, stinking hydraulic liquid compressor.

There is a reason why Vauxhall's diagram has a motor that is totally disconnected from the pendulum it is supposed to manipulate. Vauxhall would not know where to start designing it. I have experience in Robotics and I would not know where to start.
http://ask.dartmouth.edu/categories/misc/55.html
When it comes to Jane's standards .I'm lower then an old stove she has in her garage.
Shannon Noll and Natalie Bassingthwaighte - Don't…:

Re: Foucault pendulums
« Reply #289 on: May 29, 2014, 06:15:56 AM »
Its pretty obvious the shyt talkers that make their living out theses bogus theories. Protect there own interests.
   
When it comes to Jane's standards .I'm lower then an old stove she has in her garage.
Shannon Noll and Natalie Bassingthwaighte - Don't…:

Re: Foucault pendulums
« Reply #290 on: May 29, 2014, 06:23:20 AM »
« Last Edit: May 29, 2014, 07:46:27 AM by charles bloomington »
When it comes to Jane's standards .I'm lower then an old stove she has in her garage.
Shannon Noll and Natalie Bassingthwaighte - Don't…:

Re: Foucault pendulums
« Reply #291 on: May 29, 2014, 06:37:36 AM »
Geoff, I'm sorry but you're incorrect.

Here's a little lesson on electromagnetism: the unity of electric and magnetic phenomena is due to Hans Christian Ørsted and André-Marie Ampère in 1819; Michael Faraday invented the electric motor in 1821, and Georg Ohm mathematically analysed the electrical circuit in 1827.

This means that Léon Foucault, who "invented" the Foucault Pendulum in 1851, could have easily used an electric motor to power his fraudulent pendulum machine. It is honestly nothing but round Earth progopanda, that's what it amounts to. There are dozens of independent researchers who back my claim.

While the first steps towards the invention of the electric motors we now have were given in the 1820's, it is totally ridiculous to say we had the kind of motors required in this thread anytime before the 1950's, and that is being very generous.

You cannot imagine the frustration that comes with robotics due to the lack of really good, controllable motors. Either the motors are too big, or too heavy, or not powerful enough to do what you want to do. Until recently we had to use hydraulic actuators instead of electric motors for many so called "robots" because of the power to weight ratio of electric motors, and that meant that by your neat little robotic arm you would have a fridge-sized, ugly, noisy, stinking hydraulic liquid compressor.

There is a reason why Vauxhall's diagram has a motor that is totally disconnected from the pendulum it is supposed to manipulate. Vauxhall would not know where to start designing it. I have experience in Robotics and I would not know where to start.
Yes we wouldn't want to display electromagnetic pendulum, invented in 1832. The public might put two & two together, Foucault pendulum is a elaborate fraud.
When it comes to Jane's standards .I'm lower then an old stove she has in her garage.
Shannon Noll and Natalie Bassingthwaighte - Don't…:

Re: Foucault pendulums
« Reply #292 on: May 29, 2014, 07:06:47 AM »
Geoff, I'm sorry but you're incorrect.

Here's a little lesson on electromagnetism: the unity of electric and magnetic phenomena is due to Hans Christian Ørsted and André-Marie Ampère in 1819; Michael Faraday invented the electric motor in 1821, and Georg Ohm mathematically analysed the electrical circuit in 1827.

This means that Léon Foucault, who "invented" the Foucault Pendulum in 1851, could have easily used an electric motor to power his fraudulent pendulum machine. It is honestly nothing but round Earth progopanda, that's what it amounts to. There are dozens of independent researchers who back my claim.

Please name one credible source. If you can't, I suggest you stop making outlandish claims such as this.

Re: Foucault pendulums
« Reply #293 on: May 29, 2014, 07:10:21 AM »
No motors used LOL It won't spin on its own for 24 hour ,so its just a summation, because you have to start its swinging again in that 24 hour period ::). You can see why wankers like this guy swallow the crap, He cant remember which way the earth is suppose to spin. How would you be having him for your teacher. Not only is he teaching shyt ,he cant even remember his shyt LOL   " class="bbc_link" target="_blank">

You don't need it to be running for 24 hours to see the effect.  ::)

Typical FE argument style is to focus on insignificant details that really have no bearing on the final result, just to try and reduce credibility. Rather than address the major point that is being discussed, you cower in the shadows.

Re: Foucault pendulums
« Reply #294 on: May 29, 2014, 07:36:48 AM »
No motors used LOL It won't spin on its own for 24 hour ,so its just a summation, because you have to start its swinging again in that 24 hour period ::). You can see why wankers like this guy swallow the crap, He cant remember which way the earth is suppose to spin. How would you be having him for your teacher. Not only is he teaching shyt ,he cant even remember his shyt LOL   " class="bbc_link" target="_blank">

You don't need it to be running for 24 hours to see the effect.  ::)

Typical FE argument style is to focus on insignificant details that really have no bearing on the final result, just to try and reduce credibility. Rather than address the major point that is being discussed, you cower in the shadows.
Those shadows I'm cowering in. Would that be a 24 hour day or a 34.7 hour day.The pendulum stands just over 70 feet high, has a bob weighing 260 pounds, and takes 34.7 hours to complete its rotation around the compass on the floor. http://ask.dartmouth.edu/categories/misc/55.html
You don't need it to be running for 24 hours to see the effect
No apparently not 34.7 .Earth must of been having an off day spinning. Maybe it got bogged down in the crap.   
« Last Edit: May 29, 2014, 07:41:50 AM by charles bloomington »
When it comes to Jane's standards .I'm lower then an old stove she has in her garage.
Shannon Noll and Natalie Bassingthwaighte - Don't…:

?

Shmeggley

  • 1909
  • Eppur si muove!
Re: Foucault pendulums
« Reply #295 on: May 29, 2014, 07:45:32 AM »
http://ask.dartmouth.edu/categories/misc/55.html

This doesn't explain how the Foucault Pendulum is faked, it just explains how magnets are used to keep it swinging.

Giess what? I am a tin foil hat conspiracy lunatic who knows nothing... See what I'm getting at here?

Re: Foucault pendulums
« Reply #296 on: May 29, 2014, 07:49:01 AM »
http://ask.dartmouth.edu/categories/misc/55.html

This doesn't explain how the Foucault Pendulum is faked, it just explains how magnets are used to keep it swinging.
34.7 hours. what day of the weeks that ?
When it comes to Jane's standards .I'm lower then an old stove she has in her garage.
Shannon Noll and Natalie Bassingthwaighte - Don't…:

?

Shmeggley

  • 1909
  • Eppur si muove!
Re: Foucault pendulums
« Reply #297 on: May 29, 2014, 08:05:06 AM »
 Saturthurs. Obviously they are using metric time.
Giess what? I am a tin foil hat conspiracy lunatic who knows nothing... See what I'm getting at here?

Re: Foucault pendulums
« Reply #298 on: May 29, 2014, 08:19:40 AM »
No motors used LOL It won't spin on its own for 24 hour ,so its just a summation, because you have to start its swinging again in that 24 hour period ::). You can see why wankers like this guy swallow the crap, He cant remember which way the earth is suppose to spin. How would you be having him for your teacher. Not only is he teaching shyt ,he cant even remember his shyt LOL   " class="bbc_link" target="_blank">

You don't need it to be running for 24 hours to see the effect.  ::)

Typical FE argument style is to focus on insignificant details that really have no bearing on the final result, just to try and reduce credibility. Rather than address the major point that is being discussed, you cower in the shadows.
Those shadows I'm cowering in. Would that be a 24 hour day or a 34.7 hour day.The pendulum stands just over 70 feet high, has a bob weighing 260 pounds, and takes 34.7 hours to complete its rotation around the compass on the floor. http://ask.dartmouth.edu/categories/misc/55.html
You don't need it to be running for 24 hours to see the effect
No apparently not 34.7 .Earth must of been having an off day spinning. Maybe it got bogged down in the crap.   

Sigh...the time for the pendulum to make one rotation is dependent on the location on earth. At the north pole it would be 24 hours.

P=1 day/sine (latitude)

Back to the shadows, child.
« Last Edit: May 29, 2014, 08:21:34 AM by evildylan »

*

RealScientist

  • 417
  • Science does not care for Earth's shape
Re: Foucault pendulums
« Reply #299 on: May 29, 2014, 10:49:11 AM »
Geoff, I'm sorry but you're incorrect.

Here's a little lesson on electromagnetism: the unity of electric and magnetic phenomena is due to Hans Christian Ørsted and André-Marie Ampère in 1819; Michael Faraday invented the electric motor in 1821, and Georg Ohm mathematically analysed the electrical circuit in 1827.

This means that Léon Foucault, who "invented" the Foucault Pendulum in 1851, could have easily used an electric motor to power his fraudulent pendulum machine. It is honestly nothing but round Earth progopanda, that's what it amounts to. There are dozens of independent researchers who back my claim.

While the first steps towards the invention of the electric motors we now have were given in the 1820's, it is totally ridiculous to say we had the kind of motors required in this thread anytime before the 1950's, and that is being very generous.

You cannot imagine the frustration that comes with robotics due to the lack of really good, controllable motors. Either the motors are too big, or too heavy, or not powerful enough to do what you want to do. Until recently we had to use hydraulic actuators instead of electric motors for many so called "robots" because of the power to weight ratio of electric motors, and that meant that by your neat little robotic arm you would have a fridge-sized, ugly, noisy, stinking hydraulic liquid compressor.

There is a reason why Vauxhall's diagram has a motor that is totally disconnected from the pendulum it is supposed to manipulate. Vauxhall would not know where to start designing it. I have experience in Robotics and I would not know where to start.
http://ask.dartmouth.edu/categories/misc/55.html

There you can see that the pendulum moves for hours after the power goes out, and nobody is worried about it. The pendulum works whether with or without the added impulse, and the mechanism to give some impulse is there, in plain view. If you want you can see and hear how the impulse is restored.

You can make your own pendulum, and make it work without any mechanisms.