would a clocks pendulum oscilate if the clock were freefalling on earth?
87940
g ia actually 9.80m/s^2 for free falling bodies. And about the clocks pendulum, if you see it in a technical point of view, the answer would be NO; but it also depends on how the clock is dropped. The point is both the clock and the pendulum would freefall (9.80). Theoretically it's possible for the pendulum to swing but I can't explain it.
606294
If they were in the same place and time, 'same' mathematically, they would fall at same speed.\n\nIf they were in different places or time, the forces exert on them may be different e.g. the moon which cause tides, and the gravitational acceleration 'g' is different from place to place.\n\nMy answer is different, coz' I am not a physicist but an engineer. I take everything into account. Of course, there are many forces beside gravitation and air resistant.\n\n"No air resistant" doesn't mean that there is only gravity. Besides, gravity different from place to place.
365073
We will be telling that earth rotates clokwise and all heavenly objects are moving anticlokwise.\n\nOr we would make all clocks move in opposite direction and will be telling that earth rotates anticlockwise and others rotate in clockwise.
137467
if we concider A there nothing special with his frame of reference other than that of B.a and b are in symmetrical frames.so their will be no difference in their clocks.
308200
Neither Observer EXPERIENCES a change. The ONLY way any comparison can be made between the two unmentioned but essential clocks is to bring them together in the same rest frame again: then whichever clock ticktocked the least would be shown to be the one which accelerated and slowed down in their relative travel.
6756
Scientists are delaying the start of 2006 by the first "leap second" in seven years, a timing tweak meant to make up for changes in the Earth's rotation.\n\nThe adjustment will be carried out by sticking an extra second into atomic clocks worldwide at the stroke of midnight Coordinated Universal Time, the widely adopted international standard, the US National Institute of Standards and Technology said this week.\n\nFor more info, visit:\nhttp://www.theage.com.au/news/world/a-year-late/2005/12/25/1135445473624.html
443971
So far time dilation is possible in the forward direction. That is if YOU travel away from earth in a very fast spaceship near the speed of light then turn around and come back. The people on earth would age more then you have. YOUR clock would be different then those people on earth. It would be faster.\n\nGoing backward in time is still up there.\n\nThere are many experiments that prove this to be true. Atomic clocks capable of high accuracy are sync up. One is put on a plane and flown around the earth at high speeds for a long time. When the two clocks were compared later, they showed a difference, a very small difference but a difference none the less.\n\nTake a look at this website. There are plenty of other site out there.\n\nhttp://imagine.gsfc.nasa.gov/docs/ask_astro/answers/050225a.html\n\nInterestingly, if you did travel at the speed of light, you would be anywhere and everywhere all at once... WOW! That blows my mind.    :-)
90476
It is not effected to any significant degree.\n\nThe numbers used to do any calculations would absorb any effect which may occur.  For instance the mass of the Earth is about 5.9742 E24 kg.  But do you really think this is an exact number, no, it is just an estimate rounded off.  To try to use this value for the Earth's mass to try to calculate the effects of something so insignificant will not work too well.\n\nWhen you are standing on the Earth, you and the Earth together have a certain angular momentum.  When you jump, angular momentum must be conserved (its the law).  But now that your mass is rotating slightly farther out than it used to be, your angular momentum changes, there for the Earth's must change ever so slightly to compensate.\n\nIf you wanted "numbers and calculations", you did not specificy nearly enough information.
504085
no since the photons are mass-less, they have no inertia.\n\nand BTW Quantum mechanics and QCD as well as QED, have nothing to do with oscillations, they deal strictly with the emission and absorption of subatomic particles, it is String theory that deals with Oscillations.
950064
Yes in the center the gravitational pull would be equal from all sides, freefall!
789176
I'll take a simpler interpretation of the question and say one second is "calculated" to be 1/86400th of a day, where 86400 is the product of 24 hours times 60 minutes/hour times 60 seconds/minute. Problem is that the day (say from local noon to local noon by measuring the sun's highest point in the sky) is not constant throughout the year, so it was decided to use the average day looking over the whole year. \nFor very precise timings of experiments in the laboratory, one needs a very good pendulum or something else that oscillates or vibrates at a very constant frequency; then you can work back to what fraction of a day or how many seconds something takes. \nIn modern times cesium atoms provided the constant well defined measurable frequency, and scientists agreed to "define" one second as some number of these oscillations (9,192,631,770). Now when the earth decides to rotate at a different rate, scientists add leap seconds instead of redefining the second every year. \nLately the reliability of the cesium atom has been questioned, and since the speed of light (in vacuum) is defined as a fundamental "constant", the second can indeed be defined as how long it takes light to go some distance (299,792,458 meters), but that seems circular to me because I see a meter defined as how far light goes in 1/299,792,458 of a second.
94632
Assuming (1) the Earth isn't torn apart by the impact of such a meteor and (2) the Earth wasn't molten rock in the center, you could safely expect this ball to go through the hole toward the center of the Earth, pass through the center and start moving towards the opposite end of the Earth.\n\nBecause the ball won't have gained enough kinetic energy to then break away from Earth's gravity (in the same way a pendulum always comes back and finally, to rest), the ball will then slow to a stop and return back towards the center.  Just as a pendulum will, the ball will oscillate back and forth for a while until its potential energy evens out to zero and it stops, motionless, at the exact center of the Earth.\n\nGive it a try and let us know how it all works out, okay?
337819
The direction that a clock goes is entirely dependent on how it is made.  You can easily put the numbers in the opposite direction above the equator and have it work, so which side of the equator it's made on doesn't really matter.
156092
If you could survive a trip into a black hole (which you couldn't) you would not be aware of any change in time as you fell in. However, if you could compare the speed of your clock with that of a reference clock kept far away, then then the clock falling into the black hole would appear to slow down relative to the clock far from the hole. The place where the falling in clock would appear to 'stop' is the spherical surface called the event horizon. This is also regarded as the boundary of the black hole, since nothing crossing this surface can escape.
1073455
No, you've got it backwards, it flushes counter-clockwiswe above the equator, and clockwise below. Right on the equator should flush counter-clockwise as well.
130806
Depends on whether the escape mechanism powers the pendulum in both directions. Many have to be push started and depend on a gravity return to get another power swing after reversing.\nThats a swinging pendulum.\nA horizontal movement with dual powered action would not do much better because the weighted part is often hung on a suspension wire. No gravity, no hanging, no movement.\nAnswer: Leave the grandfather clock behind on your next trip to Mars. It wont work.
757410
This equation only works for small angles theta < 10 degrees\n\nPeriod = 2*pi * sqrt (length / g)\n\nThe period in an undamped simple pendulum does not depend on mass.\n\nThere is a more in depth formula for larger angles on hyperphysics.