TO: Erasmus 00:
That is an accurate summary of the conventional 'explanation' of the straying nature of 'Foucault's Pendulum'. I have spent thousands of hours studying that 'explanation', with the conclusion that the 'explanation' is pseudo-science, a metaphysical conjuring trick, a lie.
The 'space speeds' of given geographic points are the basis of the Coriolis Effect ( and, hence, Foucault's Pendulum). This was a CLASSIC example of "begging the question". Go back and study what Coriolis was trying to do. He was trying to demonstrate
Earthly evidence (non-astronomical) of the astronomical finding that Earth rotates relative to Space (and other heavenly bodies). Since Earth is spherical, different geographic points have different 'space speeds'.
IF those space speeds were physically manifest in Earth, that would provide a means to demonstrate said rotation.
Coriolis simply
ASSUMED that IF, and hypothesized that a long-range north / south event (such as an artillery round) would theoretically deflect.
To accept Coriolis (and Foucault) is to join them in ASSUMING that IF.
Is that scientific? I don't think so.
OK: Let's 'prove' a theory by assuming the basis of the theory. Is that the way science works? I don't think so.
A spherical pendulum does not vibrate in a plane. Earth's rotation accelerates NOTHING within Earth's gravitational field (moving or stationary).
For 170 years the scientific community has accepted as 'fact' that Coriolis discovered (long-range) non-astronomical evidence of Earth's rotation, and that Foucault discovered Local non-astronomical evidence accordingly.
Humbug. I urge you to take a fresh, independent, analytical look at Coriolis and Foucault. What you find may rock your world. Suggestion: start by re-reading 1) the established, encyclopedia version of Coriolis, then 2) my musings at
http://coriolisdupedu.blogspot.com That would give you a great starting point for your own investigation.
Thanks for your interest!!
CNG
