Misunderstanding about the Foucault Pendulum

  • Thread starter Thread starter JeffOCA
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Foucault Pendulum
AI Thread Summary
The discussion centers on the Foucault pendulum and its relationship to Earth's rotation. Foucault's initial observation involved a vibrating rod that maintained its plane of oscillation while the chuck rotated, leading to questions about why a pendulum's oscillation appears to revolve. The explanation provided clarifies that from an inertial frame perspective, the pendulum's plane remains fixed while the Earth rotates beneath it, creating the illusion of rotation. Additionally, there is confusion regarding the date of the Pantheon experiment, with some sources citing March 31, 1851, and others March 26, 1851. The conversation highlights the complexities of understanding the pendulum's behavior and the historical context of Foucault's work.
JeffOCA
Messages
48
Reaction score
0
Dear members,

I have a misunderstanding about the Foucault pendulum. In early 1851, Foucault had an insight that led to his famous discovery. This bit of serendipity occurred during construction of a pendulum clock to regulate the drive of a telescope. Foucault had secured a rod in the chuck of a lathe. Perhaps accidentally, the rod was disturbed so that it vibrated. Foucault noticed that the plane of oscillation of the vibrating rod remained fixed in orientation even as he slowly turned the chuck. This observation inspired him with the notion that the vibrating motion of a freely suspended pendulum might somehow be related to the earth’s rotation.

Foucault noticed that the plane of oscillation of the vibrating rod remained fixed even if the chuck rotated. In the Pantheon's experiment, the Earth is the rotating chuck and the rod is the pendulum. So, why the plane of oscillation of the pendulum revolves and why the plane of oscillation of the vibrating rod do not ? I don't understand the logical link between : "the plane of oscillation" and "necessarily it is due to Earth's spining".

Another question :
According to some articles, the Pantheon experiment occurred on March 31st, 1851 but in other articles we can find March 26th, 1851. Somebody knows ?


Jeff
 
Physics news on Phys.org
JeffOCA said:
Dear members,

Foucault noticed that the plane of oscillation of the vibrating rod remained fixed even if the chuck rotated. In the Pantheon's experiment, the Earth is the rotating chuck and the rod is the pendulum. So, why the plane of oscillation of the pendulum revolves and why the plane of oscillation of the vibrating rod do not ? I don't understand the logical link between : "the plane of oscillation" and "necessarily it is due to Earth's spining".

The logic behind that effect is best imaginable if you think about a pendulum stationed on the north or south pole (with regards to Earth's rotation). As the Earth rotates so does the chuck. But plane of oscillation remains fixed. This is how an inertial frame observer would see it. But from our point of view it seems like chuck is fixed and plane of oscillation rotates (we are observing the pendulum from chuck's frame of reference). I hope this helped.
 
Thanks !
Your explanation helped me !

Another question :
According to some articles, the Pantheon experiment occurred on March 31st, 1851 but in other articles we can find March 26th, 1851. Somebody knows ?


Jeff
 

Thread '1:1 versus 2:1 Mechanical Advantage debate'

The rope is tied into the person (the load of 200 pounds) and the rope goes up from the person to a fixed pulley and back down to his hands. He hauls the rope to suspend himself in the air. What is the mechanical advantage of the system? The person will indeed only have to lift half of his body weight (roughly 100 pounds) because he now lessened the load by that same amount. This APPEARS to be a 2:1 because he can hold himself with half the force, but my question is: is that mechanical...
View full post »

Thread 'Newton's first law?'

Some physics textbook writer told me that Newton's first law applies only on bodies that feel no interactions at all. He said that if a body is on rest or moves in constant velocity, there is no external force acting on it. But I have heard another form of the law that says the net force acting on a body must be zero. This means there is interactions involved after all. So which one is correct?
View full post »

Thread 'Free fall of person in a sled to direct horizontal motion by atmospheric resistance'

Let there be a person in a not yet optimally designed sled at h meters in height. Let this sled free fall but user can steer by tilting their body weight in the sled or by optimal sled shape design point it in some horizontal direction where it is wanted to go - in any horizontal direction but once picked fixed. How to calculate horizontal distance d achievable as function of height h. Thus what is f(h) = d. Put another way, imagine a helicopter rises to a height h, but then shuts off all...
View full post »

Similar threads

I On whether the motion of a Foucault pendulum bob is comparable to ballistics
Replies
10
Views
2K
Will this rotate like a Foucult's pendulum ? Why not ?
Replies
10
Views
2K
Foucault Pendulum at the North Pole
Replies
9
Views
2K
I Alternative Approach to Solving Foucault's Pendulum Behavior
Replies
8
Views
2K
Why Doesn't the Foucault Pendulum's Oscillation Plane Rotate with Earth?
Replies
2
Views
3K
I Connection between Foucault pendulum and parallel transport
Replies
6
Views
3K
Intuitive understanding of Thomas precession
2
Replies
70
Views
11K
Geocentricism, could you comment on a conversation I had about it?
Replies
6
Views
4K
How Do Waves Propagate on a String?
Replies
0
Views
5K
Ball Lightning Debunk, New Proposal
Replies
1
Views
4K

Hot Threads

Recent Insights

Back
Top