I love that you're doing this. One of the most dramatic demonstrations is when you reverse the weights to the opposite side and see the deflection reverse, but it doesn't look like you can do that with the beams in the middle. Still great though.
May I suggest isolating the center pivot thing from the frame itself. Right now you could conceivably have vibrations rattle from the wheels under the concrete through the frame to the hanging point.
I considered that, as well. I didn't see an obvious way to keep the center pivot in the center without attaching it to the frame. I have to apply considerable force to the ropes to make it pivot. I tried tying it to the wall behind it (opposite the ropes I pull on) and hot gluing it to the floor, but it still popped loose and shifted toward me. I don't really want this thing permanently attached to my garage floor, so shooting some powder-actuated nails into it is out of the question. Other ideas?
Thanks for the effort you put in this experiment. I really do admire that. I don't see a big problem in flow or air currents or wathever because they lie in a completely different frequency range. They are either brief (high frequency disturbance), or constant, so they will fall out of the equation. What is important though (in my opinion) is everything around the eigenfrequency of the pendulum. so if the eigenfrequency is in the order of hours, movement of the earth, oceans and moon become important. I'm not a science denier or a flath earther, but I'm just a critical thinker. In fact, I use physics a lot in my day to day work. I do a lot of frequency domain analysis and over the years, I have collected some questions that nobody ever was able to answer. Maybe you can help me. One is about the precession of the earth. It's told to be in the order of 20.000 years. But according to the heisenberg uncertainty principle, you need at least half a period of measurement time to be able to calculate this with a bound uncertainty. How can you explain this? There's also trouble with hidden variables. History taught us they don't exist. But the Bell experiment assumed GR predicts equal chance for orientation while that is not true. in 3D space, the distribution becomes a cosine. Exactly the same as Maxwell. Recent research about quantum dynamics showed they could look at sidelobes of the main wave which to me sounds like they finally found the hidden variables. They only didn't admit that in so many words.
Oh, I can't wait for this to be finished. I'm going to subscribe to watch the updates. Glad to see you are setup with non-metallic weights. FYI I looked at a science kit for university and it was $1000+ for a small apparatus to do this experiment. Be wary of the Flat Earthers!
This might be one case in which the price is justified. Or at least more justified than some of the other ridiculously priced classroom demo products out there. I'm using a lot of materials I had already but would guess I'll use around $200 in supplies for my low-tech version. I'm sure precision machining pieces specifically for this purpose would add quite a bit of expense to that!
Andrew Bennett Do you have an idea how long it will take you to finish the setup and make a video about your results? It looks like you have at least done 75% of the ground work and are about ready to do the experiment.
I'm nearly finished with the giant laser protractor, then I can begin collecting data. I'll have to wait for everything to settle, then each data set will take several hours, so it will be a while before I have data to publish. Update showing the laser protractor by the end of this week. Thanks for your interest!
What if you replaced the large masses with one with the same volume but made from pure iridium? The high density of this metal would make the attraction more intense, am I right?
You do understand that for a two mass system, one with 50kg the other with 0.5kg distanced by 10cm the force of attraction is only 1.668575x10-7 N ? To get a better idea, this is equivalent to 170 μgf (170 micrograms !!) Considering that a mosquito weights 2.5 milligrams, we're talking about a gravitational force approx 15 times smaller than the weight of a mosquito... How do you expect that such tiny force overcomes the inertia of 0.5kg plus the inertia of the torsion bar, air drag, etc?
What have you done to eliminate magnetic and static electricity forces? Concrete will contain materials that can interact with a magnet as can what looks like a steel weight which can interact with the Earth's magnetic field and magnetite in the concrete. All masses should be at the same potential (grounded) and should be non magnetic. Just my two cents worth.
I like it! That will definitely be one of the variations I run. Looking at the classroom demonstration of this experiment that PASCO makes, I noticed that the torsional balance is in a separate chamber from the heavy weights applying the torque. Seems they though this was a good way to go, too!
I have a proposal for a variant of this experiment that might be interesting. Flat Earthers try to deny gravity by saying that the results of Cavendish's experiment are due to magnetism. That could be disproved by putting two small neodymium magnets at the same distance, but in the opposite direction from the lead blocks. As lead is not magnetic the experiment will work anyway, despite the magnetic field working against it. Finally, to demonstrate that it is not a trick, without cutting the footage, two small pieces of iron are placed on the lead blocks, which are easily lifted with the neodymium magnets. I have not found on the internet that someone has done it, and I myself do not have the means to do it. Hopefully you are interested. Regards.
@@AndrewBennettScience Guy out here had a really big propane tank he was trying to sell for $120 When they get to where they wont pass inspection they generally cost more to cut up and scrap than the scrap yard pays ...so if one is sharp and pesistant he can find them for free....if you want one in 3 or 5 years from now start putting the word out.
Cnd Brn79 , "earth’s gravity" -- a force produced by the mass of earth by virtue of it having mass -- has never been measured, never been proven via the scientific method.
I love that you're doing this. One of the most dramatic demonstrations is when you reverse the weights to the opposite side and see the deflection reverse, but it doesn't look like you can do that with the beams in the middle. Still great though.
May I suggest isolating the center pivot thing from the frame itself. Right now you could conceivably have vibrations rattle from the wheels under the concrete through the frame to the hanging point.
I considered that, as well. I didn't see an obvious way to keep the center pivot in the center without attaching it to the frame. I have to apply considerable force to the ropes to make it pivot. I tried tying it to the wall behind it (opposite the ropes I pull on) and hot gluing it to the floor, but it still popped loose and shifted toward me. I don't really want this thing permanently attached to my garage floor, so shooting some powder-actuated nails into it is out of the question. Other ideas?
Andrew Bennett, Titen concrete anchor screws are removable, but you would still have to drill holes in the floor and patch them when you finish.
I'll look into this. Thanks for the suggestion!
Thanks for the effort you put in this experiment. I really do admire that. I don't see a big problem in flow or air currents or wathever because they lie in a completely different frequency range. They are either brief (high frequency disturbance), or constant, so they will fall out of the equation. What is important though (in my opinion) is everything around the eigenfrequency of the pendulum. so if the eigenfrequency is in the order of hours, movement of the earth, oceans and moon become important. I'm not a science denier or a flath earther, but I'm just a critical thinker. In fact, I use physics a lot in my day to day work.
I do a lot of frequency domain analysis and over the years, I have collected some questions that nobody ever was able to answer. Maybe you can help me. One is about the precession of the earth. It's told to be in the order of 20.000 years. But according to the heisenberg uncertainty principle, you need at least half a period of measurement time to be able to calculate this with a bound uncertainty. How can you explain this?
There's also trouble with hidden variables. History taught us they don't exist. But the Bell experiment assumed GR predicts equal chance for orientation while that is not true. in 3D space, the distribution becomes a cosine. Exactly the same as Maxwell. Recent research about quantum dynamics showed they could look at sidelobes of the main wave which to me sounds like they finally found the hidden variables. They only didn't admit that in so many words.
Oh, I can't wait for this to be finished. I'm going to subscribe to watch the updates. Glad to see you are setup with non-metallic weights. FYI I looked at a science kit for university and it was $1000+ for a small apparatus to do this experiment. Be wary of the Flat Earthers!
This might be one case in which the price is justified. Or at least more justified than some of the other ridiculously priced classroom demo products out there. I'm using a lot of materials I had already but would guess I'll use around $200 in supplies for my low-tech version. I'm sure precision machining pieces specifically for this purpose would add quite a bit of expense to that!
Andrew Bennett Do you have an idea how long it will take you to finish the setup and make a video about your results? It looks like you have at least done 75% of the ground work and are about ready to do the experiment.
I'm nearly finished with the giant laser protractor, then I can begin collecting data. I'll have to wait for everything to settle, then each data set will take several hours, so it will be a while before I have data to publish. Update showing the laser protractor by the end of this week. Thanks for your interest!
@@AndrewBennettScience you do realise gravity isn't a force in current science.
What force is this measuring? :)
What if you replaced the large masses with one with the same volume but made from pure iridium? The high density of this metal would make the attraction more intense, am I right?
Can't wait for see the experiment
You do understand that for a two mass system, one with 50kg the other with 0.5kg distanced by 10cm the force of attraction is only 1.668575x10-7 N ?
To get a better idea, this is equivalent to 170 μgf
(170 micrograms !!)
Considering that a mosquito weights 2.5 milligrams, we're talking about a gravitational force approx 15 times smaller than the weight of a mosquito... How do you expect that such tiny force overcomes the inertia of 0.5kg plus the inertia of the torsion bar, air drag, etc?
Is there an update to this... 2 years and no replication yet ? what happened.
What have you done to eliminate magnetic and static electricity forces? Concrete will contain materials that can interact with a magnet as can what looks like a steel weight which can interact with the Earth's magnetic field and magnetite in the concrete. All masses should be at the same potential (grounded) and should be non magnetic. Just my two cents worth.
Do you try with diferents materials? Lead, iron, sulfur and get same results?
The big containers when move , do air currents , they must be outside
Can you run plastic down between the bar and the weights to eliminate any wind currents that are caused by moving the weights?
I like it! That will definitely be one of the variations I run. Looking at the classroom demonstration of this experiment that PASCO makes, I noticed that the torsional balance is in a separate chamber from the heavy weights applying the torque. Seems they though this was a good way to go, too!
How can you be sure that bugs running around do not alter the experiment?
I have a proposal for a variant of this experiment that might be interesting.
Flat Earthers try to deny gravity by saying that the results of Cavendish's experiment are due to magnetism.
That could be disproved by putting two small neodymium magnets at the same distance, but in the opposite direction from the lead blocks. As lead is not magnetic the experiment will work anyway, despite the magnetic field working against it.
Finally, to demonstrate that it is not a trick, without cutting the footage, two small pieces of iron are placed on the lead blocks, which are easily lifted with the neodymium magnets.
I have not found on the internet that someone has done it, and I myself do not have the means to do it. Hopefully you are interested.
Regards.
Gravity is based on size not mass: “The Final Theory: Rethinking Our Scientific Legacy “, Mark McCutcheon.
whres the end of this?
تجربة كافنديش: جاذبية أم اختلال توازن ua-cam.com/video/rOZ1HGLvSGU/v-deo.html
Yes my dude. Keep on working. This experiment is really interesting.
Built a giant vacuum chamber
That would be so fun to have around! My students would love it. Once I win the lottery I'll get right on it. :)
Andrew Bennett I wounder if it would be possible to shrink your experiment down and put it in a small vacuum chamber
@@AndrewBennettScience Guy out here had a really big propane tank he was trying to sell for $120 When they get to where they wont pass inspection they generally cost more to cut up and scrap than the scrap yard pays ...so if one is sharp and pesistant he can find them for free....if you want one in 3 or 5 years from now start putting the word out.
If you don't use iron, the result will be different.
Mass has never been proven to produce a mystical pull
That's a lie. What do you think this experiment was created to test
Jeremy Lawrence , “Gravity” is a lie. “Gravity” is a ridiculous theory that has never been proven.
@@habanero5866 ua-cam.com/video/Mcg2h--JDv4/v-deo.html
Cnd Brn79 , "earth’s gravity" -- a force produced by the mass of earth by virtue of it having mass -- has never been measured, never been proven via the scientific method.
@@habanero5866 correct.