ROTARY-ISH MOTION

My target audience for this piece is everyone who has recently tried to open substantive discussion with any member of the Ruling Science Clique on any topic which the Clique has already deemed to be settled . Silly you. Wanting to reopen consideration of such topics amounts to wanting to question the infallibility of the Clique. Which is, as far as the Clique is concerned, The Seven Deadly Sins All Rolled Into One. If you have begged any member of the Clique to meet you in a public place for open discussion on a topic such as: Climate Change, Darwinian Evolution or Looks-Like-Intelligent Design, then the spirit in which the Clique has received you has no doubt been pretty much like this...

So youve already seen the ugly reality behind the faadewhich is the nightand-day-opposite of their carefully projected MYSTIQUE of piety, objectivity and deep-seated Love of Truth. From your own experience, you now know different. The Cliques Mystique no longer holds any power over your mind. Or does it???

Im guessing that you still concedemaybe overtly, maybe on a subconscious level that fully credentialed Clique members are smarter than you at least about certain highly-specialized-skill subjects (just like you defer to the superior expertise of copier machine repairmen or heart surgeons). If so, then youre still giving them too much credit. You are still not completely cured. You havent gotten all of the Mystique infection out of your mind. Even on the most highly technical, pointy-headed topics, you need to resist any urge you might have to give the Clique the benefit of the doubt about anything. If they have an opinion about something going on in the real world where you live, then they need to be prepared to justify their position just like everyone else. Ill bet that Foucaults Pendulum is an example of the highexpertise subjects you STILL tend to give the Clique a free pass on, for whatever reason. But ...do they deserve it? Good God, No!

Foucaults Pendulums are monuments to the reality that the Clique are not to be trusted about anything.

Have you ever seen or heard a coherent explanation of what a Foucault Pendulum doesor any of its little whys and hows? Well, hellhow could you have when not one member of the Cliqueever anywherehas produced such a thing. Their minds dont work like that. What they have is an imaginary phenomenon in an imaginary world. What is this world like? Well, it rotates 360 per day. And its a place where you can build a big pendulum that could freely rotate 360, but at the same time will not do so. Whatever azimuth you launch the bob on, it will stick to. It will always oscillate in a plane. The launch azimuth and the azimuth of the plane of swing will always be the same. Thus, while oscillating, the pendulums bob will magically resist that aspect of Gravity which tries to pull it around @ 360 per day (along with every other bit of that worlds matter). Thus, while oscillating, it will be just as if the bob (and its plane of swing) are magically separated hovering just above the worlds surface. Then, if you should observe this world from on high, you would see the plane of swing hold its position while the rest of the world rotated beneath (or as background for) it at a rate of 360 per day. That, my friend, is Leon Foucaults world. And it is a crazy, spooky, really scary place. People who spend too much time there (like the Clique) go incurably nuts. If you think there is ANY reasonable doubt of this, then you need to check them out. Take ANY of the loads of explanatory efforts posted on this internet by Cliquers. There are lots of user friendly explanations dumbeddown for outsiders like you and me. Here are links to a couple of nice examples (videos put out by friendly local Physics Professors): Www.youtube.com?watch?v=aMxLVDuf4VY Www.youtube.com/watch?v=sWDi-XK3rgw&feature=fvwrel

These spokesmen for the Clique make my point much more effectively than any words I could ever write. If we assume that their words accurately convey the pictures in their minds, then the One Thing they convey best is this: They are thoroughly confused. They have at best a vague idea of how things work in Foucaults World. (They have never even tried to articulate its properties the way I did a couple of paragraphs back.). And they have NEVER EVEN TRIED to rationally connect Foucaults World with Planet Earth. They cant put 2 coherent sentences together about Foucaults Pendulum. But THEY BELIEVE. They cant actually articulate their belief, but they would die defending it. Pathetic. In their own minds, of course, the Cliquers believe that they CAN & DO articulate the whole rationale of Foucaults Pendulum, in spades.I refer to any of 1,000 or so available versions of a mathematical explanation for their pendulum trick. Many of them, in a cute and condescending way, are dumbed-down for the benefit of us poor dumb outsiders. A good example would be Prof J. Wolfes effort @ Www.animations.physics.unsw.edu.au/jw/pendulumdetails.html

Heres the deal: a mathematical formula describing an irrational concept is doomed to be irrationalas in: worthless. Look at the opening words of Professor Wolfes exposition:

We treat the earth as rotating about its axis with angular velocity relative to an inertial frame.

THATS as far as anyone needs to read. Lookyou know that a Cliquer is getting ready to use math to test whether the plane of swing of a big pendulum placed on top of the North or South Pole would change vs the rest of Earth @ the rate of 360 per day, or not. Then the clever Cliquer BEGINS by setting the ground rules. 1) The Natural (base line) Earth is non-rotating, which will be called inertial 2) The Rotating Earth is Discrete from base line Earth, and theyll call that noninertial. 3) Rotation affects surface movement in a non-inertial frame of reference, but not in an inertial one. Which, youll notice, also turns out to be the dramatic conclusion, 3 pages later. Which means that what follows isnt PROOF of anything. It is merely a mathematical depiction of what is assumed at the outset. The formulas which follow describe how the resultant behavior could be predicted in the imaginary world where the hypothetical behavior might be taking place (where rotation = ). It is like someone decides to create an animated film to show how a polar pendulum would work in Foucaults World. If he wants to give the artists precise instructions for the proportionality of the movements of the moving parts vs the stationary parts, then hed draw up a set of detailed specifications. THAT is what the mathematical proofs of Foucaults Pendulum actually amount to. Nothing more. There is something either missing or broken in the Clique brain. The part that makes normal folk look around and ask, What am I seeing?, and How is this happening?, and How Come? is simply absent from the Clique brain. So a rational society should treat Cliquers and their opinions accordingly. Rather than treating them like prophets, we ought to put them all in quarantine.

2011 C N GIFFORD Springfield, MO 65804 THE FINAL AUTHORITY ON FOUCAULTS PENDULUM