The pendulum bias paradox experiment

[Tusk]

Hi all, my name is Steven C. Ross and this is my first post at overunity.com. This is a simple little experiment - easily replicated - the conditions for which I extrapolated from known phenomena. However, as I haven't seen it around my guess is that the elements haven't been put together in this way before, but I can't say with any certainty. The short video is at the following web address, be sure to view it to the end or you could miss the paradox:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wjzKIE6m02w&feature=youtu.be

As the experiment demonstrates, conventional perceptions of energy regarding (at least) mass in motion are fundamentally flawed due to their dependance on frame of reference. The motion of the centre of mass of the two ball & block systems through our 'static' frame of reference dictates the outcome of each collision with results apparently at odds with the initial equilibrium condition of the two ball system, in which the centre of mass is static in the observer's frame of reference. Since momentum is the 'parent' phenomena, that is to say the collision outcome is determined by momentum (the motion of the centre of mass of the system is unaffected by the collision within the system) then any general perceptions of 'energy exchange' must be based on frames of reference. This of course is already known, but just seeing it written down is no substitute for actually watching the phenomena unfold.

Personally I found it refreshing to witness the phenomena in such a way as to make it very clear that energy, at least kinetic energy, far from being absolute, is simply variable and dependent - literally - on your point of view.





     

[Tusk]

Wow tough crowd. I guess that's the problem with a paradox. If anyone wants further explanation on this one feel free to drop me a line.

[MileHigh]

I looked at your clip and I don't see any paradox.  I saw wooden the block move different distances depending on which ball hit the block, but so what?  Is that what you are suggesting is the paradox?  Nothing looked unusual to me.

[Tusk]

Nothing looked unusual to me.

Thanks for your reply MileHigh. Perception is everything. Someone (presumably like yourself) with a good grasp of basic physics would certainly understand why the small ball (having significantly more kinetic energy than the large ball) does not dominate in the collision. To the untrained eye however, the balls appear to have equal energy in the two ball collision, yet the ball and block collisions demonstrate that this is certainly not the case.

No paradox can survive it's own solution. To those familiar with the phenomena I offer my apologies.

[Tusk]

Ok I'll come back another notch; my previous comment was one of gentle sarcasm, apparently to no avail. Perhaps a direct approach then.

In order to dispel the paradox it is necessary to explain - beyond a simple reference to the disparities of momentum and kinetic energy - why in the two ball collision the small ball (which has the greater kinetic energy) does not dominate the collision. Not recognising the paradox merely indicates an 'off the shelf' perception based on conventional dogma. (hint - statements like 'one collision is inertial while the other is non-inertial' explain nothing)

Why does the ball with greater kinetic energy not dominate?

I was led to believe this was the right place for the examination and discussion of unconventional ideas. There's more where this came from but I'm going to need a little more to work with than indifference.