Vacuum/air pressure without a container

I've been listening to lots of flat earth podcasts and watching many videos. I'm a firm globe earth believer, but I'm fascinated by the arguments and how the debates go.

There seem to be a handful of ideas that flat earthers hold that form the foundation of their point of view. These include

Just trust your senses, what you see and experience.
Can't see or measure the curve.
Air pressure needs a container if it's against the vacuum of space.
and more

It's this third one that seems to have an easy rational global argument. I know we globers talk about gravity and how planets form, etc, but this isn't enough to satisfy a flat earther. I'd like to understand a flat earther's response to some easy questions that I think can help on this pressure-needs-a-container point of view. Can you help me to understand how a flat earther cannot see how that this following presssure/vacuum argument isn't valid?

Here are a few simple questions and observations, and I'd really like your feedback on them:

Do you believe that air pressure decreases with altitude? If yes, please go to the next question. If no, then I think we're done and I believe you are ignoring a lot of well-established evidence.

Why does air pressure decrease with altitude? Your answer here isn't critical to the next questions but I'd really like to know your explanation.

If air pressure decreases with altitude, what does that plot look like? You can find many of these plots online. I know you haven't personally done these experiments but still it would be hard to not believe them. If you don't believe then the I guess we're done here.

Many/most of these plots show that at some altitude air pressure is measured to go to zero. Do you believe this is true? If not, what do you believe about air pressure vs altitude, and what's the lowest the pressure goes with altitude?

If you accept these plots showing that at some altitude air pressure becomes close to a vacuum (~30,000 meters or so), then isn't that a demonstration of how we can have normal air pressure at the earth's surface but vacuum in space without the need for a containment vessel?

Maybe the containment vessel you have in mind is a firmament or dome. OK, but at what altitude? is it higher than this ~30,000 meters where it's essentially a vacuum?

Regardless of the existence of a dome, if you agree that the air pressure indeed does decrease with altitude then you can't use the pressure-needs-a-container argument because, given your agreement about pressure decreasing with altitude, then you must admit that at some altitude the pressure can be vacuum, without need for a containment vessel.

I'd really like to get your point of view on this line of thinking.

Steveo, when it's boiled down, globe earthers can accommodate that the entire world is a globe, while flat earthers dismiss the globe earth as superfluous. The vocal flat earthers are the ones foolish enough to think their movement can topple basic science that inform modern civilization.

The sooner flat earthers accept the reality of the situation and realise flat earth is just a lifestyle choice, the sooner these madmen will quit trying in vain to prove to everybody the entire planet is shaped like a coin.

Right c. You have no clue 👍

A plane that flies level over a two thousand mile flight ,other than adjustments in flight,


Follows a straight level path, never curving.

If you believe the surface curves so much over 3 miles, it makes ships curve downward out of view, ‘winning’ over ‘curvature’, then we should see that curve from another angke too!

When you see the first and second mile over that ocean from a side view, the ocean is flat and horizontal, so is the ship sailing out 2 miles.

No made up curve seen at all

I'd really like to hear a flat earth response to my post on vacuum/air pressure without a container.

[refuted BS]

You have had that refuted BS refuted countless times and it has absolutely nothing to do with the topic.
Yet here you are spamming irrelevant BS just because you can't answer simple questions.

Actually I take part of that back, there is one tiny part which is relavent.
Planes using an altimeter. The simplest is based upon air pressure, clearly establishing the existence of the pressure gradient.
Does that means you fully accept such a gradient exists?

it looks to me that flat earthers can't respond to my simple questions that debunk the vessel argument.

I don't ever want to hear this pressure/vessel argument again because it's completely wrong and meaningless.

Steveo, when it's boiled down, globe earthers can accommodate that the entire world is a globe, while flat earthers dismiss the globe earth as superfluous. The vocal flat earthers are the ones foolish enough to think their movement can topple basic science that inform modern civilization.

When you say it is foolish for flat earthers to think they can "topple basic science", you mean "expose basic science", right?

The sooner flat earthers accept the reality of the situation and realise flat earth is just a lifestyle choice, the sooner these madmen will quit trying in vain to prove to everybody the entire planet is shaped like a coin.

In reality, all science, religion and prime time TV viewing choices are "lifestyle" choices, no?

A plane that flies level over a two thousand mile flight ,other than adjustments in flight,


Follows a straight level path, never curving.

You don't understand the meaning of the term "level".  It means a line which  is perpendicular to a line drawn to the center of mass of earth.  As the plane flies, the course is adjusted to be close to level at all times.  This means, it will automatically follow the curvature of the earth.   

If you believe the surface curves so much over 3 miles, it makes ships curve downward out of view, ‘winning’ over ‘curvature’, then we should see that curve from another angke too!

Which we do observe.  The curve is too gradual to actually see with our eyes while standing on the ground, but we observe its effects, such as ships disappearing over the horizon, bottom first. 

When you see the first and second mile over that ocean from a side view, the ocean is flat and horizontal, so is the ship sailing out 2 miles.

No made up curve seen at all

What does "side view" mean in this context???  Where are you standing, on the moon???

I don't know why I'm responding to your post.  It is clear that either you are pranking people by pretending to defend the flat earth concept, or you have no understanding of basic physics and geometry, so that you are only fooling yourself. 

BTW, are you a Pastafarian?

Quote from: turbonium2 on April 19, 2024, 05:58:57 AM

A plane that flies level over a two thousand mile flight ,other than adjustments in flight,


Follows a straight level path, never curving.

You don't understand the meaning of the term "level".  It means a line which  is perpendicular to a line drawn to the center of mass of earth.  As the plane flies, the course is adjusted to be close to level at all times.  This means, it will automatically follow the curvature of the earth.   

Quote

If you believe the surface curves so much over 3 miles, it makes ships curve downward out of view, ‘winning’ over ‘curvature’, then we should see that curve from another angke too!

Which we do observe.  The curve is too gradual to actually see with our eyes while standing on the ground, but we observe its effects, such as ships disappearing over the horizon, bottom first. 

Quote

When you see the first and second mile over that ocean from a side view, the ocean is flat and horizontal, so is the ship sailing out 2 miles.

No made up curve seen at all

What does "side view" mean in this context???  Where are you standing, on the moon???

I don't know why I'm responding to your post.  It is clear that either you are pranking people by pretending to defend the flat earth concept, or you have no understanding of basic physics and geometry, so that you are only fooling yourself. 

BTW, are you a Pastafarian?

To be level, is always a straight line, perpendicular to all points along it.

It is not perpendicular to only its center, at one point of it at the center of it.

A level measures over its length, as a flat, straight horizontal line across a surface or above a surface in air.

Saying that level is perpendicular to one point in its center is misleading and false, it is all points along a level which are perpendicular to it.

Levels measure FOR level, flat, straight and horizontal paths, surfaces, lines.

They cannot be only perpendicular at one point in center, they are perpendicular at all points along them.

They’re not like a seesaw, one point in center that goes level for a moment over and over again, though that is level at all points as well.

There simply is no mechanism of levels that has any curves involved in them.

A curve is the very opposite of straight lines, level and flat and horizontal lines or surfaces.

Curved surfaces are much more complex and difficult to measure for than flat surfaces are.

Curved surfaces cannot be measured with levels, no matter how slight of curve over it.

Levels always measure for straight, flat and horizontal lines or surfaces.  Nothing else.

Scale down a sheet of metal to the Earth’s ‘curvature’, and try to measure for level over it yet have a curve remain over it.

Curved surfaces over a sphere, are greater curving down with more distance along them. Levels are completely useless in measuring any curved surfaces, they measure for flat surfaces.

Levels measure over their length, over two points, end to end.  A path, a line, a vector.

Obviously they’re perpendicular at the point in their center, all points are perpendicular over them!

Levels use straight and horizontal lines and paths and surfaces measuring for level. They don’t measure for curves, don’t have made up magical forces make them measure for a curve, just because it wants them to measure the curve of ball Earth surface as being ‘level’!

 

Quote from: gnuarm on April 25, 2024, 03:28:55 PM

Quote from: turbonium2 on April 19, 2024, 05:58:57 AM

A plane that flies level over a two thousand mile flight ,other than adjustments in flight,


Follows a straight level path, never curving.

You don't understand the meaning of the term "level".  It means a line which  is perpendicular to a line drawn to the center of mass of earth.  As the plane flies, the course is adjusted to be close to level at all times.  This means, it will automatically follow the curvature of the earth.   

Quote

If you believe the surface curves so much over 3 miles, it makes ships curve downward out of view, ‘winning’ over ‘curvature’, then we should see that curve from another angke too!

Which we do observe.  The curve is too gradual to actually see with our eyes while standing on the ground, but we observe its effects, such as ships disappearing over the horizon, bottom first. 

Quote

When you see the first and second mile over that ocean from a side view, the ocean is flat and horizontal, so is the ship sailing out 2 miles.

No made up curve seen at all

What does "side view" mean in this context???  Where are you standing, on the moon???

I don't know why I'm responding to your post.  It is clear that either you are pranking people by pretending to defend the flat earth concept, or you have no understanding of basic physics and geometry, so that you are only fooling yourself. 

BTW, are you a Pastafarian?

To be level, is always a straight line, perpendicular to all points along it.

It is not perpendicular to only its center, at one point of it at the center of it.

A level measures over its length, as a flat, straight horizontal line across a surface or above a surface in air.

Saying that level is perpendicular to one point in its center is misleading and false, it is all points along a level which are perpendicular to it.

Levels measure FOR level, flat, straight and horizontal paths, surfaces, lines.

They cannot be only perpendicular at one point in center, they are perpendicular at all points along them.

They’re not like a seesaw, one point in center that goes level for a moment over and over again, though that is level at all points as well.

There simply is no mechanism of levels that has any curves involved in them.

A curve is the very opposite of straight lines, level and flat and horizontal lines or surfaces.

Curved surfaces are much more complex and difficult to measure for than flat surfaces are.

Curved surfaces cannot be measured with levels, no matter how slight of curve over it.

Levels always measure for straight, flat and horizontal lines or surfaces.  Nothing else.

Scale down a sheet of metal to the Earth’s ‘curvature’, and try to measure for level over it yet have a curve remain over it.

Curved surfaces over a sphere, are greater curving down with more distance along them. Levels are completely useless in measuring any curved surfaces, they measure for flat surfaces.

Levels measure over their length, over two points, end to end.  A path, a line, a vector.

Obviously they’re perpendicular at the point in their center, all points are perpendicular over them!

Levels use straight and horizontal lines and paths and surfaces measuring for level. They don’t measure for curves, don’t have made up magical forces make them measure for a curve, just because it wants them to measure the curve of ball Earth surface as being ‘level’!

To hell with your definitions. I'm going tell a simple statement. Planes always fly TANGENTIALLY to the surface of the earth. Except when taking off and landing, of course. So now tell me, why does the plane keep making adjustments to stay parallel to the tangent of the earth at that point?

Quote from: gnuarm on April 25, 2024, 03:28:55 PM

Quote from: turbonium2 on April 19, 2024, 05:58:57 AM

A plane that flies level over a two thousand mile flight ,other than adjustments in flight,


Follows a straight level path, never curving.

You don't understand the meaning of the term "level".  It means a line which  is perpendicular to a line drawn to the center of mass of earth.  As the plane flies, the course is adjusted to be close to level at all times.  This means, it will automatically follow the curvature of the earth.   

Quote

If you believe the surface curves so much over 3 miles, it makes ships curve downward out of view, ‘winning’ over ‘curvature’, then we should see that curve from another angke too!

Which we do observe.  The curve is too gradual to actually see with our eyes while standing on the ground, but we observe its effects, such as ships disappearing over the horizon, bottom first. 

Quote

When you see the first and second mile over that ocean from a side view, the ocean is flat and horizontal, so is the ship sailing out 2 miles.

No made up curve seen at all

What does "side view" mean in this context???  Where are you standing, on the moon???

I don't know why I'm responding to your post.  It is clear that either you are pranking people by pretending to defend the flat earth concept, or you have no understanding of basic physics and geometry, so that you are only fooling yourself. 

BTW, are you a Pastafarian?

To be level, is always a straight line, perpendicular to all points along it.

It is not perpendicular to only its center, at one point of it at the center of it.

When on a globe earth, level can only be determined at one point at a time.  While in common use, a level line is often straight, that's only because the line would need to be quite long to have significant error.  Over a distance of miles, adjustments need to be made to keep the entire line actually level at every point (or approximately so).

I know you don't accept the globe earth, so you won't accept this definition.  But this is reality in the world where we live.

A level measures over its length, as a flat, straight horizontal line across a surface or above a surface in air.

Sure, if you are trying to hang a picture, you don't need to worry about such details as we encounter with longer lengths on the globe earth. 

Saying that level is perpendicular to one point in its center is misleading and false, it is all points along a level which are perpendicular to it.

Huh?  Perpendicular to what???

Levels measure FOR level, flat, straight and horizontal paths, surfaces, lines.

They cannot be only perpendicular at one point in center, they are perpendicular at all points along them.

Oh, you mean perpendicular to the line to the center of the earth mass?  There's the detail that you are missing.  On a globe earth, the line perpendicular to the level points to the center of mass of the earth.  As soon as you move, that line is different. 

They’re not like a seesaw, one point in center that goes level for a moment over and over again, though that is level at all points as well.

There simply is no mechanism of levels that has any curves involved in them.

A curve is the very opposite of straight lines, level and flat and horizontal lines or surfaces.

Curved surfaces are much more complex and difficult to measure for than flat surfaces are.

Curved surfaces cannot be measured with levels, no matter how slight of curve over it.

Hmmm.. that's strange that you say this.  We have been doing it for thousands of years.  I guess no one included you in the conversation.

Levels always measure for straight, flat and horizontal lines or surfaces.  Nothing else.

Sure, as long as you are not working with long lines, the curvature of the earth is not significant. 

Scale down a sheet of metal to the Earth’s ‘curvature’, and try to measure for level over it yet have a curve remain over it.

I'm not following what you mean.  Not sure why you are working with a curved sheet of metal.  Are you talking about a sphere of metal?

Curved surfaces over a sphere, are greater curving down with more distance along them. Levels are completely useless in measuring any curved surfaces, they measure for flat surfaces.

Sure, but any curve can be approximated by a straight line, if you consider a short enough segment.  That's why we can lay "level" floors in even large buildings.  But, if the object being level is large enough, you need to consider the curvature of the earth to suit your needs.  Otherwise, one part of the floor will feel like it's uphill or downhill. 

Levels measure over their length, over two points, end to end.  A path, a line, a vector.

Obviously they’re perpendicular at the point in their center, all points are perpendicular over them!

You keep talking about "all points are perpendicular" without saying to what?  What are you talking about?  Perpendicular refers to the orientation of two lines, specifically they are at a right angle.  On a globe earth, the lines to the center of mass are all at different angles, so you can't have more than one be perpendicular to the level line.  Is this not clear to you?

Levels use straight and horizontal lines and paths and surfaces measuring for level. They don’t measure for curves, don’t have made up magical forces make them measure for a curve, just because it wants them to measure the curve of ball Earth surface as being ‘level’!

No "magical forces" required.  I'm not even sure why you are talking about forces.  Where do forces come into this?

To be level, is always a straight line

No it isn't.
Repeating the same lie wont save you.

A level measures over its length, as a flat

No, a straight edge does.
Many straight edges have a level built in, but it is not the level that measures for straight.

Saying that level is perpendicular to one point in its center is misleading and false

It is specifically the point where the level itself is.

Curved surfaces cannot be measured with levels

Sure they can, as Earth has been countless times.

Levels always measure for straight, flat and horizontal lines or surfaces.  Nothing else.

Again, repeating the same lies wont help you.

Scale down a sheet of metal to the Earth’s ‘curvature’, and try to measure for level over it yet have a curve remain over it.

You mean to the point of you not being able to detect the curve?

I've been listening to lots of flat earth podcasts and watching many videos. I'm a firm globe earth believer, but I'm fascinated by the arguments and how the debates go.

There seem to be a handful of ideas that flat earthers hold that form the foundation of their point of view. These include

Just trust your senses, what you see and experience.
Can't see or measure the curve.
Air pressure needs a container if it's against the vacuum of space.
and more

It's this third one that seems to have an easy rational global argument. I know we globers talk about gravity and how planets form, etc, but this isn't enough to satisfy a flat earther. I'd like to understand a flat earther's response to some easy questions that I think can help on this pressure-needs-a-container point of view. Can you help me to understand how a flat earther cannot see how that this following presssure/vacuum argument isn't valid?

Here are a few simple questions and observations, and I'd really like your feedback on them:

Do you believe that air pressure decreases with altitude? If yes, please go to the next question. If no, then I think we're done and I believe you are ignoring a lot of well-established evidence.

Why does air pressure decrease with altitude? Your answer here isn't critical to the next questions but I'd really like to know your explanation.

If air pressure decreases with altitude, what does that plot look like? You can find many of these plots online. I know you haven't personally done these experiments but still it would be hard to not believe them. If you don't believe then the I guess we're done here.

Many/most of these plots show that at some altitude air pressure is measured to go to zero. Do you believe this is true? If not, what do you believe about air pressure vs altitude, and what's the lowest the pressure goes with altitude?

If you accept these plots showing that at some altitude air pressure becomes close to a vacuum (~30,000 meters or so), then isn't that a demonstration of how we can have normal air pressure at the earth's surface but vacuum in space without the need for a containment vessel?

Maybe the containment vessel you have in mind is a firmament or dome. OK, but at what altitude? is it higher than this ~30,000 meters where it's essentially a vacuum?

Regardless of the existence of a dome, if you agree that the air pressure indeed does decrease with altitude then you can't use the pressure-needs-a-container argument because, given your agreement about pressure decreasing with altitude, then you must admit that at some altitude the pressure can be vacuum, without need for a containment vessel.

I'd really like to get your point of view on this line of thinking.

What you are not taking into consideration is that flat earth belief is just that, a belief with no real evidence required. Why? Because no such evidence exists.
That is a crucial point to understand about flat earth belief. It’s a belief that exists outside of any evidence or proof so to equalise their own minds they have to dismiss anything as fake that may contradict what they believe. The fact that their belief rests on a giant global conspiracy tells you all you need to know about them and how they think.

There are no flat earth maps and neither are there any so called ‘flat earth models’ as all they have are fictions.

Instead what flat earth believers will do is use a combination of lack of understanding and pure ignorance to construct a narrative that they imagine fits with what they wish to believe. This is done after they have dismissed any contradictory evidence by labelling it all fake, which is a monumental leap aided by crass ignorance.
A classic example is their use of their belief around Saturn to ‘prove’ their beliefs about the nature of stars.
They start by preparing the field by proclaiming the whole of astronomy is fake! Now that takes some swallowing but swallow it they do washed down by huge amounts of ignorance. Next they take some wobbly out of focus footage of Saturn shot with a cheap digital camera to prove their point, which is of course is produced using both ignorance and lack of any understanding and hey presto… you have flat earth belief.
The fact they don’t ask why the footage shot is wobbly and out of focus says all you need to know about both them and their beliefs.
Flat earthers don’t care about any evidence or proof as they themselves have none and as such have to dismiss anything that contradicts their beliefs.

You can spend as much time as you wish producing logical arguments but in the end it will mean nothing to the flat earth believer.

it looks to me that flat earthers can't respond to my simple questions that debunk the vessel argument.

I don't ever want to hear this pressure/vessel argument again because it's completely wrong and meaningless.

Ok, time to get real, people.

Stevie, is you last name, "Curious", or "Crackpipe"?

It looks like there can't be a calm, logical discussion here. I don't know if that's just this particular site or with FE's in general.

Quote from: stevec on April 19, 2024, 03:04:45 PM

it looks to me that flat earthers can't respond to my simple questions that debunk the vessel argument.

I don't ever want to hear this pressure/vessel argument again because it's completely wrong and meaningless.

Ok, time to get real, people.

Stevie, is you last name, "Curious", or "Crackpipe"?

Touché!  I love it when an argument is won on technical grounds.  j-)