Difference between revisions of "Talk:The Coriolis Effect"
Tom Bishop (talk | contribs) |
Tom Bishop (talk | contribs) |
||
| (2 intermediate revisions by the same user not shown) | |||
| Line 6: | Line 6: | ||
{{cite|the experiment has been done before. I love this presentation, but I'm unconvinced at their conclusion. What I saw before was in the Meteorology department at TAMU. Film.}} | {{cite|the experiment has been done before. I love this presentation, but I'm unconvinced at their conclusion. What I saw before was in the Meteorology department at TAMU. Film.}} | ||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
Latest revision as of 21:58, 6 October 2018
Topics for Further Research
In response to a video embedded in the Snopes link, showing the rotation of water in a 5 foot diameter pool which supposedly shows the Coriolis Effect in action, we are given a lead for further research by Rand Huso:
“ This has been done before - I saw the experiment done in the '80s. The Coriolis is so small that small perturbations in the construction of the drain could easily be amplified and become much larger than the Coriolis. The proper way to conduct this test is to repeat it many times and take the exact environment "down under" and do the same thing. As I recall, the earlier experiment was repeated 100 times, and the numbers were 49 to 51 - completely inconclusive. ”
“ the experiment has been done before. I love this presentation, but I'm unconvinced at their conclusion. What I saw before was in the Meteorology department at TAMU. Film. ”