-
I decided to make a thread exclusivity to try and find out how physics works in sceptimatic's mind. He hasn't bothered to answer in any other threads, and he told me to make a new thread, so here we are.
A few questions I have:
1. What is so special about the molecules in the atmosphere than no other molecules have. Why can we only get leverage off of the atmosphere, but not from any other object?
2. What are the laws of physics in your world?
Everybody else, chip in as well. I am sure this will require a team effort to figure out how he thinks physics works, but we may solve it yet!
EDIT: Septimatic has rage quit on this thread, so it is pretty clear that his own theory doesn't hold up. No use asking questions anymore.
-
I decided to make a thread exclusivity to try and find out how physics works in sceptimatic's mind. He hasn't bothered to answer in any other threads, and he told me to make a new thread, so here we are.
A few questions I have:
1. What is so special about the molecules in the atmosphere than no other molecules have. Why can we only get leverage off of the atmosphere, but not from any other object?
We can get leverage from any other object. What are you getting at?
2. What are the laws of physics in your world?
What exactly do you mean by laws of physics. Just so we're understanding each other.
Everybody else, chip in as well. I am sure this will require a team effort to figure out how he thinks physics works, but we may solve it yet!
Yeah well whilst you try to figure out mine, try and figure out why your own is bogus.
-
Scepti, you claim that as long as there is no atmosphere, you can't push anything, you can't get "leverage", as you say. Why? What's so special about the atmosphere?
-
So if I push my friend in space, I get leverage off of them and we both float away from each other. Is that what you are saying? Because then you have finally figured it out. Hallelujah!
-
Scepti, you claim that as long as there is no atmosphere, you can't push anything, you can't get "leverage", as you say. Why? What's so special about the atmosphere?
Hopefully you'll pay attention.
What is special about the atmosphere as opposed to the fictional vacuum of space is, the atmosphere is made up of matter with no free space between each molecule of it, or whatever you want to call each piece of it.
These molecules are extremely densely packed or are expanded, depending on where in the stack these molecules are.
Regardless of whether they are densely packed or expanded, they NEVER separate to give off any free space between them.
This is why we can move within them because we are them. We are not free of them either. We compress and expand in them as they do within themselves.
In your fictional space vacuum there is no molecule medium for anything to happen. It's what would be described as a place where suspended animation would occur, kind of thing.
You cannot have SCATTERED particles just floating about with free space in between. It's not how reality works. It's fantasy and should be seen as such.
This is why things cannot be placed into a vacuum. No rockets or humans or anything, because it does not exist.
Low pressure at elevation is a reality. It's EXPANDED matter/molecules that expand to take up more space per molecule than below.
It's because it's stacked from the bottom up and each time the atmosphere stacks up, it becomes a little bit more dense below.
You are alive because your body is reliant on being squeezed. Your molecules are kept together because your body is under pressure. You are dense (no offence) and you create a dense resistance against a stacked atmosphere that is upon your body frame.
The air you breathe is all attached. You don't breathe in random particles. You breathe in molecules that are all stuck together. You never break them, you just change the make up by expansion or contraction due to vibration/friction as your energy of your body resonates to a frequency.
Look at my avatar. Look at the layers. Imagine that gobstopper/jaw breaker being one molecule of dense matter.
That gobstopper is solid but it can be peeled apart by taking off a skin at a time. To do this you have to vibrate it at frequencies than enable certain parts of it to release.
Let's say we simply peel off the top skin. That top skin will go from expanded taking its place on another gobstopper that has less layers or be jammed between those that have similar layers...but it will always be attached to one or the other.
Once that layer is taken off it creates a surge. It creates a pressure difference. A push into other molecules.
This is the basics of basics and even saying that, it requires serious thought. Anyone that decides to go into frenzy mode. Forget it, seriously.
The genuine people, come in and try and understand what I'm saying, because if you do, you will understand why the global Earth and space is complete and utter brainwashing..as well as much of mainstream indoctrinated so called science theories.
-
So if I push my friend in space, I get leverage off of them and we both float away from each other. Is that what you are saying? Because then you have finally figured it out. Hallelujah!
No that's not what I''m saying and you know this. I should have read this before I wrote that lengthy post. But no problem, I'll be happy if some people take some kind of thought from it to help them realise the bullshit they've been brought up to swallow.
Back to you.
You couldn't get leverage in your space because there's nothing to lever off of to create propulsion. You stay attached to your friend in your space environment of fantasy.
-
[...]
The genuine people, come in and try and understand what I'm saying, because if you do, you will understand why the global Earth and space is complete and utter brainwashing..as well as much of mainstream indoctrinated so called science theories.
I read your theory with interest. It has some coherence to it. I'll try to understand it.
Can you point me to one or two observations that I could make myself that are more readily explained by your theory than by mainstream science?
-
So if I push my friend in space, I get leverage off of them and we both float away from each other. Is that what you are saying? Because then you have finally figured it out. Hallelujah!
No that's not what I''m saying and you know this. I should have read this before I wrote that lengthy post. But no problem, I'll be happy if some people take some kind of thought from it to help them realise the bullshit they've been brought up to swallow.
Back to you.
You couldn't get leverage in your space because there's nothing to lever off of to create propulsion. You stay attached to your friend in your space environment of fantasy.
If I throw a ball in a vacuum it will stick to my hand?
What causes the atmosphere to "stack up"? Why is the lower atmosphere more dense? Why do more dense things sink? The answer is of course gravity, but I don't think you have thought that through.
-
So, where does all the rocket fuel go after it is burned?
What if I collected a jar of atmosphere, took it to space, then opened it? What would happen to the air inside that jar?
-
Low pressure at elevation is a reality. It's EXPANDED matter/molecules that expand to take up more space per molecule than below.
It's because it's stacked from the bottom up and each time the atmosphere stacks up, it becomes a little bit more dense below.
But why? What is so special about down? Without gravity, why is it "more dense below"? Why do things "stack" down and not up?
In standard theory "down" is defined by the direction of earth's gravitational pull. Without gravity then you don't have any down. I know you have a dome to stop the atmosphere's molecules from floating off, but why isn't atmospheric pressure the same everywhere, no matter what your height?
-
FINALLY! YOU RESPONDED!
I take this to be the heart of you arguments:
You cannot have SCATTERED particles just floating about with free space in between. It's not how reality works. It's fantasy and should be seen as such.
Why? How did you determine that? Remember, skepticism is NOT rejecting everything the mainstream says. It's questioning everything and determining why and if something is the way someone tells you it is. So again I ask you: why, and how did you determine this?
-
This may be a bit off topic, but I'd love to get a great explanation of "pressure" based gravity or preferably a citation I can follow that's not on YouTube.
-
This may be a bit off topic, but I'd love to get a great explanation of "pressure" based gravity or preferably a citation I can follow that's not on YouTube.
I'll do my best.
I'll use liquids first since they are easier to understand, then I will move to gasses.
If you have a pool, The deeper you go, the greater the pressure increases. This is because the deeper you go, the more weight of water is above you. A cool way to test this out is to take a see-through cup, hold it upside-down, and dunk it as far underwater as you can. The deeper you go, the higher the water level will be inside the cup, and the more "squeezed" the air inside will get.
The water wants to create an even surface with the lowest potential energy. It wants to get as much of it as low as possible. This is why if you put some water in a u-shaped pipe, both ends come to an equal level. (You can try this yourself.) The weight of water above you is dependent on gravity because that is what is giving the water weight. If there was no gravity, the water would float around and there would be no pressure anywhere (there actually would be some pressure because of surface tension, but it would be negligible.) The denser the water is, the more weight it has in a smaller space. Since this makes it's potential energy higher if it is at the same level and volume as a liquid with lower density. Thus, the denser liquid goes to the bottom to lower total potential energy the most. This is why denser liquids sink to the bottom of less dense liquids. (You can try this yourself.)
Liquids are incompressible, but gasses can be compressed, which means that they change density at different pressure. However, it behaves much the same as liquids. The denser gasses sink to the bottom (which is why smoke always goes up. It is less dense.) And it tries to spread out evenly. As you increase air pressure, the air tries to equalize more and more which creates forces. This is why if you have a water bottle and you drive to a higher altitude, it will bulge and let loose a lot of air when you open it.
If you have any questions, let me know. You can try these out for yourself.
Here are a few experiments for
-
I'm sure John is familiar with air/water pressure. I think his question was directed toward Sceptimatic and his (frankly ridiculous) statements on "denpressure".
-
[...]
The genuine people, come in and try and understand what I'm saying, because if you do, you will understand why the global Earth and space is complete and utter brainwashing..as well as much of mainstream indoctrinated so called science theories.
I read your theory with interest. It has some coherence to it. I'll try to understand it.
Can you point me to one or two observations that I could make myself that are more readily explained by your theory than by mainstream science?
To observe anything you must first understand what it is that you would be observing and why it is so.
Show me that you grasp some of it and we will see how you can gain some kind of proof by experiment.
-
What about the other questions?
-
If I throw a ball in a vacuum it will stick to my hand?
Assuming you could survive in a vacuum, as scientists would have you believe, then your ball throw is pointless because your arm holding that ball has no leverage from your body in order to throw and release to motion, except the motion of your arm extending outward with the ball.
The result is the ball at your palm or at best, your finger tip, assuming you extend that fingertip next to the ball.
What causes the atmosphere to "stack up"?
Release of gases under the Earth due to the energy Earth gives out.
They start from the ground and are pushed to the surface. Then more molecules are pushed under the first ones, then more molecules are pushed under those and so on and so on with each push coming up against more pressure of molecules in the stack.
The more this push happens the more dense the atmosphere gets.
Anything that grows into that atmosphere, such as plants or us or whatever, has to push their molecular makeup into it and feel the envelope of pressure back onto them.
Why is the lower atmosphere more dense?
Stacking.
Why do more dense things sink?
More dense objects hold much less atmosphere, so they become less buoyant. This is why some objects do not sink to the bottom of a pool (for instance). It's due to the fact that they still hold trapped atmosphere which the water pressure cannot push out readily. However if you were to push down with more energy, you would sink it fully because you would aid in releasing the trapped atmosphere.
This is why centrifuges work in separating liquids and what not.
The answer is of course gravity, but I don't think you have thought that through.
Yeah I have thought it through. However, I know someone who refuses to.
-
So, where does all the rocket fuel go after it is burned?
I take it you mean in space?
If so then the rocket fuel goes nowhere because it simply wouldn't burn and there simply would be no rocket in space for it to be a reality.
What if I collected a jar of atmosphere, took it to space, then opened it? What would happen to the air inside that jar?
What happens to your balloon of atmosphere when left inside a chamber then evacuated of some pressure?
It expands and would eventually be breached due to the atmosphere inside it being allowed to expand due to the lower pressure against the balloon, allowing the balloon with higher pressure atmosphere inside of it to expand more freely.
This would happen to your jar.
At sea level your jar is basically equal inside and out. Some minor pressure changes would happen but not enough to cause any problem.
However, if you lower the external pressure, your jar will explode, eventually.
-
Low pressure at elevation is a reality. It's EXPANDED matter/molecules that expand to take up more space per molecule than below.
It's because it's stacked from the bottom up and each time the atmosphere stacks up, it becomes a little bit more dense below.
But why? What is so special about down? Without gravity, why is it "more dense below"? Why do things "stack" down and not up?
In standard theory "down" is defined by the direction of earth's gravitational pull. Without gravity then you don't have any down. I know you have a dome to stop the atmosphere's molecules from floating off, but why isn't atmospheric pressure the same everywhere, no matter what your height?
I tried my utmost to explain this top you before and you simply tried to mock me. I'm not about to give you another go by wasting my time explaining to you. I suggest you just read what gets said in this thread and it may answer your questions...or may not, but then again I really don't give a flying flock.
-
If I am in space, and I use the extending of my 1 meter long arm to accelerate a ball 1 m/s^2 (it would take 1.4 seconds to fully extend my arm) The ball would be going 1.4 seconds right before I can't extend my arm anymore. If the ball is not sticking to my hand, what is stopping it once my arm is fully extended?
-
FINALLY! YOU RESPONDED!
I take this to be the heart of you arguments:
You cannot have SCATTERED particles just floating about with free space in between. It's not how reality works. It's fantasy and should be seen as such.
Why? How did you determine that? Remember, skepticism is NOT rejecting everything the mainstream says. It's questioning everything and determining why and if something is the way someone tells you it is. So again I ask you: why, and how did you determine this?
Common sense and doing experiments with chambers for pressure evacuation.
Basically sweeping aside the bullshit to uncover the reality.
-
FINALLY! YOU RESPONDED!
I take this to be the heart of you arguments:
You cannot have SCATTERED particles just floating about with free space in between. It's not how reality works. It's fantasy and should be seen as such.
Why? How did you determine that? Remember, skepticism is NOT rejecting everything the mainstream says. It's questioning everything and determining why and if something is the way someone tells you it is. So again I ask you: why, and how did you determine this?
Common sense and doing experiments with chambers for pressure evacuation.
Basically sweeping aside the bullshit to uncover the reality.
why does a 10cm cubed block of aluminium fall at the same rate as a same size block of lead?
-
FINALLY! YOU RESPONDED!
I take this to be the heart of you arguments:
You cannot have SCATTERED particles just floating about with free space in between. It's not how reality works. It's fantasy and should be seen as such.
Why? How did you determine that? Remember, skepticism is NOT rejecting everything the mainstream says. It's questioning everything and determining why and if something is the way someone tells you it is. So again I ask you: why, and how did you determine this?
Common sense and doing experiments with chambers for pressure evacuation.
Basically sweeping aside the bullshit to uncover the reality.
why does a 10cm cubed block of aluminium fall at the same rate as a same size block of lead?
It doesn't.
-
If I throw a ball in a vacuum it will stick to my hand?
Assuming you could survive in a vacuum, as scientists would have you believe, then your ball throw is pointless because your arm holding that ball has no leverage from your body in order to throw and release to motion, except the motion of your arm extending outward with the ball.
The result is the ball at your palm or at best, your finger tip, assuming you extend that fingertip next to the ball.
What causes the atmosphere to "stack up"?
Release of gases under the Earth due to the energy Earth gives out.
They start from the ground and are pushed to the surface. Then more molecules are pushed under the first ones, then more molecules are pushed under those and so on and so on with each push coming up against more pressure of molecules in the stack.
The more this push happens the more dense the atmosphere gets.
Anything that grows into that atmosphere, such as plants or us or whatever, has to push their molecular makeup into it and feel the envelope of pressure back onto them.
Why is the lower atmosphere more dense?
Stacking.
Why do more dense things sink?
More dense objects hold much less atmosphere, so they become less buoyant. This is why some objects do not sink to the bottom of a pool (for instance). It's due to the fact that they still hold trapped atmosphere which the water pressure cannot push out readily. However if you were to push down with more energy, you would sink it fully because you would aid in releasing the trapped atmosphere.
This is why centrifuges work in separating liquids and what not.
The answer is of course gravity, but I don't think you have thought that through.
Yeah I have thought it through. However, I know someone who refuses to.
I am in vacuum of space. I take the ball, move it behind my head and push it forward with my arm, in a typical ball throwing motion, I let go of the ball once it gets to the end of my reach.
Are you saying the ball goes nowhere? That I am unable to move my arm in a vacuum? That the ball sticks to my hand when I pull it back?
Let's say I can get my arm moving around 30 mph from behind my head to in front of my head, are you saying the ball is not moving 30 mph now in my hand? That if I let it go and pull my hand back the ball goes nowhere?
As for your idea that the gasses come from under then Earth due to Earth energy, what are you smoking? Seriously, Earth energy making gasses?
-
I am in vacuum of space. I take the ball, move it behind my head and push it forward with my arm, in a typical ball throwing motion, I let go of the ball once it gets to the end of my reach.
Are you saying the ball goes nowhere? That I am unable to move my arm in a vacuum? That the ball sticks to my hand when I pull it back?
Let say you have the ball clenched in your fist. You decide to open your fist and pull your arm back away from the ball. You leave the ball where your fist was and your fist is now as far back to your body as your joint allows. That's your lot.
Forward wise you extend your arm with the ball on it and you're left with an extended arm with the ball at the end of it, until you decide to pull your arm away from that ball.
You go nowhere and neither does the ball, otehr than what I've stated.
Let's say I can get my arm moving around 30 mph from behind my head to in front of my head, are you saying the ball is not moving 30 mph now in my hand? That if I let it go and pull my hand back the ball goes nowhere?
Ok, try and run in space. Make then legs go as fast as possible . What happens?
Nothing, right? You go nowhere. This is because you have no friction to effect any movement otehr than the movement of your limbs that keep you in the same spot.
Now try and throw the ball and the same thing happens. You have no leverage/friction to aid in a push. All you can do is make the ball move with your hand.
Try your best to think about it if you're serious.
As for your idea that the gasses come from under then Earth due to Earth energy, what are you smoking? Seriously, Earth energy making gasses?
-
What is stopping the ball? It is moving at some speed while your arm is pushing it (not clenching it) so what stops it from moving?
-
I am in vacuum of space. I take the ball, move it behind my head and push it forward with my arm, in a typical ball throwing motion, I let go of the ball once it gets to the end of my reach.
Are you saying the ball goes nowhere? That I am unable to move my arm in a vacuum? That the ball sticks to my hand when I pull it back?
Let say you have the ball clenched in your fist. You decide to open your fist and pull your arm back away from the ball. You leave the ball where your fist was and your fist is now as far back to your body as your joint allows. That's your lot.
Forward wise you extend your arm with the ball on it and you're left with an extended arm with the ball at the end of it, until you decide to pull your arm away from that ball.
You go nowhere and neither does the ball, otehr than what I've stated.
Let's say I can get my arm moving around 30 mph from behind my head to in front of my head, are you saying the ball is not moving 30 mph now in my hand? That if I let it go and pull my hand back the ball goes nowhere?
Ok, try and run in space. Make then legs go as fast as possible . What happens?
Nothing, right? You go nowhere. This is because you have no friction to effect any movement otehr than the movement of your limbs that keep you in the same spot.
Now try and throw the ball and the same thing happens. You have no leverage/friction to aid in a push. All you can do is make the ball move with your hand.
Try your best to think about it if you're serious.
As for your idea that the gasses come from under then Earth due to Earth energy, what are you smoking? Seriously, Earth energy making gasses?
You are still not answering the question. The ball is in my clinched fist. I move the ball and my clinched fist forwards at let's say 30 mph and open my fist. Are you saying the ball does not continue on at 30 mph? It goes no where? That it slows from 30 mph to 0 mph as soon as I open my fist?
-
What is stopping the ball? It is moving at some speed while your arm is pushing it (not clenching it) so what stops it from moving?
In order to push and release something to accelerate it away from you, you have to have leverage.
Your space provides no leverage at all.
-
Yet you say that we are able to extend our arm. How is are arm moving if nothing can accelerate?
-
I am in vacuum of space. I take the ball, move it behind my head and push it forward with my arm, in a typical ball throwing motion, I let go of the ball once it gets to the end of my reach.
Are you saying the ball goes nowhere? That I am unable to move my arm in a vacuum? That the ball sticks to my hand when I pull it back?
Let say you have the ball clenched in your fist. You decide to open your fist and pull your arm back away from the ball. You leave the ball where your fist was and your fist is now as far back to your body as your joint allows. That's your lot.
Forward wise you extend your arm with the ball on it and you're left with an extended arm with the ball at the end of it, until you decide to pull your arm away from that ball.
You go nowhere and neither does the ball, otehr than what I've stated.
Let's say I can get my arm moving around 30 mph from behind my head to in front of my head, are you saying the ball is not moving 30 mph now in my hand? That if I let it go and pull my hand back the ball goes nowhere?
Ok, try and run in space. Make then legs go as fast as possible . What happens?
Nothing, right? You go nowhere. This is because you have no friction to effect any movement otehr than the movement of your limbs that keep you in the same spot.
Now try and throw the ball and the same thing happens. You have no leverage/friction to aid in a push. All you can do is make the ball move with your hand.
Try your best to think about it if you're serious.
As for your idea that the gasses come from under then Earth due to Earth energy, what are you smoking? Seriously, Earth energy making gasses?
You are still not answering the question. The ball is in my clinched fist. I move the ball and my clinched fist forwards at let's say 30 mph and open my fist. Are you saying the ball does not continue on at 30 mph? It goes no where? That it slows from 30 mph to 0 mph as soon as I open my fist?
It doesn't matter what you do in space, you can effect no external motion onto an object to accelerate it away from you.
You could have a million balls on you ( assuming fantasy) and you can keep putting one at arms length then get another from your body and put that at arms length to push the other one a ball further. You could do this and have a long line of one million balls touching each other with the very last on touching your finger tip.
Obviously this is assuming your space that's been indoctrinated into you.
-
Yet you say that we are able to extend our arm. How is are arm moving if nothing can accelerate?
Because it's part of your body.
-
So is the ball being pushed by our hand moving?
-
So is the ball being pushed by our hand moving?
Just decide what you think. I'm finished.
-
So is the ball being pushed by our hand moving?
Just decide what you think. I'm finished.
I am trying to find out what you think about physics. I already know what I think. You asked me to make this thread.
-
So is the ball being pushed by our hand moving?
Just decide what you think. I'm finished.
Well what we all think is that your theory has major holes in it provided by a simple baseball. It makes no logical sense that if we can accelerate an object, like our arm, that we can not apply that acceleration to an outside object.
If the ball was floating in front of my face and I swung my hand and slapped it, would my hand break because the ball can not move?
-
So is the ball being pushed by our hand moving?
Just decide what you think. I'm finished.
I am trying to find out what you think about physics. I already know what I think. You asked me to make this thread.
Yeah I know. I'm out of here. You'll have to carry your stuff on with those who are willing.
I'm giving up in arguing about this stuff. I'm getting back to my football.
See you and no hard feelings. ;)
-
What propels a football once it's left a foot? Inertia? 100 mph wind?
-
FINALLY! YOU RESPONDED!
I take this to be the heart of you arguments:
You cannot have SCATTERED particles just floating about with free space in between. It's not how reality works. It's fantasy and should be seen as such.
Why? How did you determine that? Remember, skepticism is NOT rejecting everything the mainstream says. It's questioning everything and determining why and if something is the way someone tells you it is. So again I ask you: why, and how did you determine this?
Common sense and doing experiments with chambers for pressure evacuation.
Basically sweeping aside the bullshit to uncover the reality.
why does a 10cm cubed block of aluminium fall at the same rate as a same size block of lead?
It doesn't.
Details please to prove.
-
Well, he asked me to make this thread, then I guess his broken theory just couldn't hold up. I'll update the OP.
-
Scepti, you claim that as long as there is no atmosphere, you can't push anything, you can't get "leverage", as you say. Why? What's so special about the atmosphere?
Hopefully you'll pay attention.
What is special about the atmosphere as opposed to the fictional vacuum of space is, the atmosphere is made up of matter with no free space between each molecule of it, or whatever you want to call each piece of it.
These molecules are extremely densely packed or are expanded, depending on where in the stack these molecules are.
Regardless of whether they are densely packed or expanded, they NEVER separate to give off any free space between them.
This is why we can move within them because we are them. We are not free of them either. We compress and expand in them as they do within themselves.
In your fictional space vacuum there is no molecule medium for anything to happen. It's what would be described as a place where suspended animation would occur, kind of thing.
You cannot have SCATTERED particles just floating about with free space in between. It's not how reality works. It's fantasy and should be seen as such.
This is why things cannot be placed into a vacuum. No rockets or humans or anything, because it does not exist.
Low pressure at elevation is a reality. It's EXPANDED matter/molecules that expand to take up more space per molecule than below.
It's because it's stacked from the bottom up and each time the atmosphere stacks up, it becomes a little bit more dense below.
You are alive because your body is reliant on being squeezed. Your molecules are kept together because your body is under pressure. You are dense (no offence) and you create a dense resistance against a stacked atmosphere that is upon your body frame.
The air you breathe is all attached. You don't breathe in random particles. You breathe in molecules that are all stuck together. You never break them, you just change the make up by expansion or contraction due to vibration/friction as your energy of your body resonates to a frequency.
Look at my avatar. Look at the layers. Imagine that gobstopper/jaw breaker being one molecule of dense matter.
That gobstopper is solid but it can be peeled apart by taking off a skin at a time. To do this you have to vibrate it at frequencies than enable certain parts of it to release.
Let's say we simply peel off the top skin. That top skin will go from expanded taking its place on another gobstopper that has less layers or be jammed between those that have similar layers...but it will always be attached to one or the other.
Once that layer is taken off it creates a surge. It creates a pressure difference. A push into other molecules.
This is the basics of basics and even saying that, it requires serious thought. Anyone that decides to go into frenzy mode. Forget it, seriously.
The genuine people, come in and try and understand what I'm saying, because if you do, you will understand why the global Earth and space is complete and utter brainwashing..as well as much of mainstream indoctrinated so called science theories.
You simply "say" all these things as though you expect everyone else to accept that what Sceppy says must be fact.
It does not work that way.
I am afraid real scientists have been questioned and ridiculed for thousands of years. Some of their ideas were retained, many more were discarded.
If you ever hope for your ideas to be accepted, then you must accept questioning and criticism from all sides and not run off in a huff!
-
Scepti, you claim that as long as there is no atmosphere, you can't push anything, you can't get "leverage", as you say. Why? What's so special about the atmosphere?
Hopefully you'll pay attention.
What is special about the atmosphere as opposed to the fictional vacuum of space is, the atmosphere is made up of matter with no free space between each molecule of it, or whatever you want to call each piece of it.
These molecules are extremely densely packed or are expanded, depending on where in the stack these molecules are.
Regardless of whether they are densely packed or expanded, they NEVER separate to give off any free space between them.
This is why we can move within them because we are them. We are not free of them either. We compress and expand in them as they do within themselves.
In your fictional space vacuum there is no molecule medium for anything to happen. It's what would be described as a place where suspended animation would occur, kind of thing.
You cannot have SCATTERED particles just floating about with free space in between. It's not how reality works. It's fantasy and should be seen as such.
This is why things cannot be placed into a vacuum. No rockets or humans or anything, because it does not exist.
Low pressure at elevation is a reality. It's EXPANDED matter/molecules that expand to take up more space per molecule than below.
It's because it's stacked from the bottom up and each time the atmosphere stacks up, it becomes a little bit more dense below.
You are alive because your body is reliant on being squeezed. Your molecules are kept together because your body is under pressure. You are dense (no offence) and you create a dense resistance against a stacked atmosphere that is upon your body frame.
The air you breathe is all attached. You don't breathe in random particles. You breathe in molecules that are all stuck together. You never break them, you just change the make up by expansion or contraction due to vibration/friction as your energy of your body resonates to a frequency.
Look at my avatar. Look at the layers. Imagine that gobstopper/jaw breaker being one molecule of dense matter.
That gobstopper is solid but it can be peeled apart by taking off a skin at a time. To do this you have to vibrate it at frequencies than enable certain parts of it to release.
Let's say we simply peel off the top skin. That top skin will go from expanded taking its place on another gobstopper that has less layers or be jammed between those that have similar layers...but it will always be attached to one or the other.
Once that layer is taken off it creates a surge. It creates a pressure difference. A push into other molecules.
This is the basics of basics and even saying that, it requires serious thought. Anyone that decides to go into frenzy mode. Forget it, seriously.
The genuine people, come in and try and understand what I'm saying, because if you do, you will understand why the global Earth and space is complete and utter brainwashing..as well as much of mainstream indoctrinated so called science theories.
I have an experiment for you, a test, or a thought experiment, taking a pinball machine and place it in a vacuum chamber set up so I can be operated from outside the vacuum chamber.
Before evacuating pull the lever and let go, of course, this pinball machine operates normally.
We evacuate the chamber to 50% of its capabilities,
We pulled lever and let it go, do we see any change in the operation of the pinball machine?
The ball moving 50% faster?
The ball moving 50% slower?
No visible change?
We now evacuate the chamber to maximum capacity.
We pulled lever and let it go, do we see any change in the operation of the pinball machine?
According to what you said above the ball would not leave the channel or even move away from the plunger: not happening, with only the drag of the surface I can see the ball actually going faster, just slightly.
-
Sceptimatics standard response will be its not possible to make a vacuum and therefore there is still atmosphere to provide 'leverage'.
-
[...]
The genuine people, come in and try and understand what I'm saying, because if you do, you will understand why the global Earth and space is complete and utter brainwashing..as well as much of mainstream indoctrinated so called science theories.
I read your theory with interest. It has some coherence to it. I'll try to understand it.
Can you point me to one or two observations that I could make myself that are more readily explained by your theory than by mainstream science?
To observe anything you must first understand what it is that you would be observing and why it is so.
Show me that you grasp some of it and we will see how you can gain some kind of proof by experiment.
Okay, my understanding so far...
There are no vacuums or free spaces.
Less matter in a space means that the molecules are expanded so that fewer of them are needed to fill the space. They still occupy the whole space.
The atmosphere is stacked such that it is denser at the bottom than higher up.
The stuff about vibration and peeling layers off molecules is less clear to me.
-
So is the ball being pushed by our hand moving?
Just decide what you think. I'm finished.
??? ??? Sceptimatic goes off in a huff when someone questions his ideas - again! ??? ???
::) Boo hoo! ::)
-
FINALLY! YOU RESPONDED!
I take this to be the heart of you arguments:
You cannot have SCATTERED particles just floating about with free space in between. It's not how reality works. It's fantasy and should be seen as such.
Why? How did you determine that? Remember, skepticism is NOT rejecting everything the mainstream says. It's questioning everything and determining why and if something is the way someone tells you it is. So again I ask you: why, and how did you determine this?
Common sense and doing experiments with chambers for pressure evacuation.
Basically sweeping aside the bullshit to uncover the reality.
That's not even remotely common sense and I've seen no experiments by you. If you have any, post them.
-
We're all not worthy, DNO. Questioning scepti about his constantly spouted bullshit and repeated lies is sacrilege and can potentially lead to another Scepti MeltdownTM.
Anyway, apparently it's atmospheric pressure which replaces gravity in scepti's little world. For whatever reason though, this 'pressure' (created from what though? Is it a force that creates/causes itself?) pushes only in the downward direction because of 'molecule stacking'... or something? But, in an evacuated chamber (very, very low pressure), all objects fall at the same rate!? I thought atmospheric pressure pushes everything down? Scepti attempts to explain this by saying that there is less resistance on the objects when they're falling so they fall more freely?!!!?!?!? What?? I thought it was the pressure that was 'pushing' everything down in the first place? Now we have much, much less pressure and not only do things not float or fall slower, they fall faster?
I am confuse.
-
I have an experiment for you, a test, or a thought experiment, taking a pinball machine and place it in a vacuum chamber set up so I can be operated from outside the vacuum chamber.
Before evacuating pull the lever and let go, of course, this pinball machine operates normally.
We evacuate the chamber to 50% of its capabilities,
We pulled lever and let it go, do we see any change in the operation of the pinball machine?
The ball moving 50% faster?
The ball moving 50% slower?
No visible change?
We now evacuate the chamber to maximum capacity.
We pulled lever and let it go, do we see any change in the operation of the pinball machine?
According to what you said above the ball would not leave the channel or even move away from the plunger: not happening, with only the drag of the surface I can see the ball actually going faster, just slightly.
Let's make this simpler because it's SPACE that we're dealing with, with you people.
Put your pinball machine in space then try and pull the LEVER. The operative word is LEVER.
What happens?
When you pull back the lever you also pull back the pin ball machine. Effectively your lever cannot pull.
Now let's use the other scenario that you might come up with.
Imagine the person pulls the lever whilst holding the pin ball machine with their other hand in order to be able to pull back on that spring lever. Ok, let's have that.
What happens?
The lever gets pulled back but the ball bearing stays put. It cannot roll down towards the lever as it's pulled back because there is no up or down in your space, so no gradient to roll.
-
No scepti. He specially stated a vacuum chamber not space. Therefore gravity applies.
-
Okay, my understanding so far...
There are no vacuums or free spaces.
Correct.
Less matter in a space means that the molecules are expanded so that fewer of them are needed to fill the space.
Correct.
They still occupy the whole space.
Correct and depending on how high up they do, they go dormant. Basically they freeze as an expansion. The opposite of freezing under dense conditions at the bottom.
The atmosphere is stacked such that it is denser at the bottom than higher up.
Yep. Think of a hole in a floor spewing up wet glue. As it builds up the outer glue molecules are under no force but their own. They sort of go dormant or freeze or basically show as a skin. (imagine this against a true vacuum outside of Earth.
As the glue builds up the outer skin stretches and stretches. Or deflates depending on the force pushed up.
Basically the cell is breathing - sort of. Expanding and contracting constantly in varying degrees of pressure. This is why we get tides.
The stuff about vibration and peeling layers off molecules is less clear to me.
It need a lot of explaining but is pointless until the pressure of atmosphere is grasped, fully.
-
So is the ball being pushed by our hand moving?
Just decide what you think. I'm finished.
??? ??? Sceptimatic goes off in a huff when someone questions his ideas - again! ??? ???
::) Boo hoo! ::)
Not at all. I don't like it when a moderator jumps into a thread to have a pop at my thoughts when that moderator has only been using his ski name for 2 days out of the entire year.
This moderator then starts to dissect topics and takes the side of the masses.
The Engineer (funnily enough) was brought in to do exactly the same. Comes in to have a go and disrupt the conversations, then disappears.
Is it any wonder I don't trust the place.
How can a moderator keep his/her privilege when they turn up for 2 days out of a year...unless they're playing many different personas.
Paranoid? Maybe. I think I have every right to be.
Take ski out of the moderator equation and lets see how he/she deals with me and how I deal with him/her. A totally different scenario.
You see I rarely have any need to have a go at moderators and I certainly don't have a go at their theories. I gave them the respect on that and yet here we are with my thoughts just dished with a hope that I disappear along with Papa Legba.
You can't get very far with mods when they start to play about with topics by locking them or moving them, etc.
-
Well what we all think is that your theory has major holes in it provided by a simple baseball. It makes no logical sense that if we can accelerate an object, like our arm, that we can not apply that acceleration to an outside object.
You're not accelerating anything.
If the ball was floating in front of my face and I swung my hand and slapped it, would my hand break because the ball can not move?
You can't slap it away. The second your hand touches the ball the ball moves with your hand. It has no medium to accelerate into.
In your vacuum there is no matter. Your ball is in suspended animation, just like you are. Obviously assuming the fantasy of it all.
-
To observe anything you must first understand what it is that you would be observing and why it is so.
That's not true at all. We can observe the sun, or objects falling, or any number of things whether or not we have any idea of why it is the way it is.
Refusing to make any observations you don't already understand is called confirmation bias. It's a fallacy, not science.
-
No scepti. He specially stated a vacuum chamber not space. Therefore gravity applies.
You cannot make anything like a vacuum at sea level. You can get lower pressure and that's your lot, depending on your pumps ability to restrict pressure from gaining entry back into the chamber as it's being allowed to expand out of it.
-
To observe anything you must first understand what it is that you would be observing and why it is so.
That's not true at all. We can observe the sun, or objects falling, or any number of things whether or not we have any idea of why it is the way it is.
Refusing to make any observations you don't already understand is called confirmation bias. It's a fallacy, not science.
I think you've just took what I've said the wrong way but never mind.
Apparently you know all about the sun and how it works. That goes for gravity and warped space time, plus a whole host of stuff that is observed one minute then hypothesised another minute, to fully calculated .
Anyway, I'm just saying. No need to delve into that.
What I was saying is, before someone decides my views are resigned to the bin or that they want explanations for more stuff after not grasping the first part, I'm basically telling them to observe the reality around them.
-
No scepti. He specially stated a vacuum chamber not space. Therefore gravity applies.
You cannot make anything like a vacuum at sea level. You can get lower pressure and that's your lot, depending on your pumps ability to restrict pressure from gaining entry back into the chamber as it's being allowed to expand out of it.
All you're arguing is semantics. Call it a vacuum chamber, evacuated chamber or a low-pressure chamber, it doesn't matter; what matters is the result. Let's say a very cheap evacuated chamber can achieve a 0.000001 Pa, why do two very different objects of varying densities and surface area fall at the exact same rate? Why do they fall at all? I thought air pressure = gravity? Here we have a very, very, very low pressure chamber, yet Newton's laws seem to hold true.
Please just answer the questions and stop arguing semantics about what a vacuum is. If you can't, we all understand.
-
All you're arguing is semantics. Call it a vacuum chamber, evacuated chamber or a low-pressure chamber, it doesn't matter; what matters is the result. Let's say a very cheap evacuated chamber can achieve a 0.000001 Pa, why do two very different objects of varying densities and surface area fall at the exact same rate?
They don't. They may fall at very similar (to the eye) rates but not exactly. As long as there's some resistance, no matter what amount, two different objects will fall at different times. the issue is in having something so accurate to prove this and there isn't anything that would be conclusive. It's down to common sense by using atmosphere to do the same test to see the objects fall at different rates.
A helicopter drop or skyscraper would suffice.
Why do they fall at all?
They fall because energy was used to put those objects into a place where their energy has now become potential energy, until released.
I thought air pressure = gravity?
It is. Gravity is just a ruse. Atmospheric pressure upon any dense object pushed into it, is reality.
Here we have a very, very, very low pressure chamber, yet Newton's laws seem to hold true.
Newtons law of supposed gravity does not hold true at all.
Please just answer the questions and stop arguing semantics about what a vacuum is. If you can't, we all understand.
I have.
-
Why do they fall at all?
They fall because energy was used to put those objects into a place where their energy has now become potential energy, until released.
So if it takes energy to move something somewhere, then when released that thing will return to where it used to be?
If I take energy to roll a ball from one end of the desk to the other, why doesn't it roll back on its own?
-
If I understand correctly, air pushing down on us is causing gravity, then what is causing the air to push down on us? Why is it denser closer to earth? everything we know about gasses is that they evenly take up space.
-
Why do they fall at all?
They fall because energy was used to put those objects into a place where their energy has now become potential energy, until released.
So if it takes energy to move something somewhere, then when released that thing will return to where it used to be?
If I take energy to roll a ball from one end of the desk to the other, why doesn't it roll back on its own?
On a level desk, if you roll a ball, then your ball is pushing atmosphere away from it's dense mass and also with each miniscule movement, it moves into another pressure after leaving behind a pressure.
Each time the ball moves, it is being friction clamped to the table and slowed down with each roll due to the friction eventually arresting the energy applied to it.
It eventually stops dead.
-
If I understand correctly, air pushing down on us is causing gravity, then what is causing the air to push down on us?
Us pushing into it, like everything else.
Why is it denser closer to earth?
I'm sorry but I have to answer a question with a question because I think it'll help you understand.
Why is it denser the further you go down in water? Answer this and you'll maybe understand.
everything we know about gasses is that they evenly take up space.
If they evenly took up space then nothing would move. There would be no heat from friction and no dormant matter like glaciers. You know, things like that because it all depends on matter not taking up even space.
The atmosphere around you is bobbing about like crazy, just molecules expanding and contracting due to energy and friction/vibration.
Your voice alone creates it's own uneven matter. It all does.
-
Water and air are denser on earth because gravity pulls them down.
Why is it denser lower down in your physics theory?
EDIT: I meant denser liquids go to the bottom. I know liquids are in compressible.
-
They don't. They may fall at very similar (to the eye) rates but not exactly. As long as there's some resistance, no matter what amount, two different objects will fall at different times. the issue is in having something so accurate to prove this and there isn't anything that would be conclusive. It's down to common sense by using atmosphere to do the same test to see the objects fall at different rates.
A helicopter drop or skyscraper would suffice.
This seems a very arbitrary, ad hoc response. Is it because all of the experiments conducted show that objects fall at the same rate and thus you must invent some reason why this is so? How did you come to the conclusion that in order for us to see a difference in acceleration of falling objects that a test chamber would have to be the height of a skyscraper? How tall of a skyscraper? When does it start to make a difference and, again, how did you determine this if by your own admission all experiments would be inconclusive because the difference would be too small to measure?
You've come to some incredible conclusions about the world having not conducted a single noteworthy experiment or even any at all.
They fall because energy was used to put those objects into a place where their energy has now become potential energy, until released.
Again, why just in the downward direction? How I picture your model is by molecules being stacked (your description) and by pushing/displacing them in the upwards direction, the molecules push back down again etc. This should also work in every direction if what you propose were true. Your responses to this question are not in any way satisfactory.
It is. Gravity is just a ruse. Atmospheric pressure upon any dense object pushed into it, is reality.
I guess I just have to take your word for it then because you offer literally zero evidence for this claim. Am I a free thinker yet?
Newtons law of supposed gravity does not hold true at all.
Well, every experiment ever conducted in evacuated chambers disagrees with your assertion and conform to Newtonian mechanics. I suppose mathematics is a conspiracy/load of baloney because it agrees (for all intents and purposes) with Einstein and Newton?
-
If I understand correctly, air pushing down on us is causing gravity, then what is causing the air to push down on us?
Us pushing into it, like everything else.
Why is it denser closer to earth?
I'm sorry but I have to answer a question with a question because I think it'll help you understand.
Why is it denser the further you go down in water? Answer this and you'll maybe understand.
everything we know about gasses is that they evenly take up space.
If they evenly took up space then nothing would move. There would be no heat from friction and no dormant matter like glaciers. You know, things like that because it all depends on matter not taking up even space.
The atmosphere around you is bobbing about like crazy, just molecules expanding and contracting due to energy and friction/vibration.
Your voice alone creates it's own uneven matter. It all does.
It's not denser the lower down water you go. Water is not compressible.
-
If I understand correctly, air pushing down on us is causing gravity, then what is causing the air to push down on us?
Us pushing into it, like everything else.
Why is it denser closer to earth?
I'm sorry but I have to answer a question with a question because I think it'll help you understand.
Why is it denser the further you go down in water? Answer this and you'll maybe understand.
everything we know about gasses is that they evenly take up space.
If they evenly took up space then nothing would move. There would be no heat from friction and no dormant matter like glaciers. You know, things like that because it all depends on matter not taking up even space.
The atmosphere around you is bobbing about like crazy, just molecules expanding and contracting due to energy and friction/vibration.
Your voice alone creates it's own uneven matter. It all does.
It's not denser the lower down water you go. Water is not compressible.
Water is compressible. It just requires a hell of a lot of force to compress it.
-
If you apply a "hell of a lot of force" to water, it turns into Ice II-VI
-
If you apply a "hell of a lot of force" to water, it turns into Ice II-VI
Really?
-
Yes.
(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/0/08/Phase_diagram_of_water.svg/700px-Phase_diagram_of_water.svg.png)
-
Yes.
(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/0/08/Phase_diagram_of_water.svg/700px-Phase_diagram_of_water.svg.png)
What physical area could we see this happening?
-
left axis, as pressure increases, eventually liquid turns to solid, no matter what temperature.
-
left axis, as pressure increases, eventually liquid turns to solid, no matter what temperature.
Ok then. I'll leave that with you. This is my last post on here, so I hope you find what you're looking for with the forum and enjoy.
:)
-
left axis, as pressure increases, eventually liquid turns to solid, no matter what temperature.
Ok then. I'll leave that with you. This is my last post on here, so I hope you find what you're looking for with the forum and enjoy.
:)
Huh, did I just see that sceptimatic saw a phase diagram and freaked out? Just as well you didn't show him a pourbaix diagram or eutectic mix.
-
Water is compressible. It just requires a hell of a lot of force to compress it.
Saying water is compressible is like saying you got money when your friend asks you, while in reality you only got a cent. Sure, you are technically correct, but saying that you have no money instead reflects your financial state much much better in most situations.
(don't go full retard and say "oh now you're explaining about water with money". it's called an analogy, which is explaining something by explaining other thing with similar principles)
If you want to quantitatively see how incompressible a material is, you can see its Poisson's Ratio (ν), just look it up on google for explanation (it's usually assigned for solids, but with same principles it can be assigned to liquids too). A perfectly incompressible material has ν=0.5, while liquid water has ν=0.499924 (http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0008884606001499), which makes it very damn close on being incompressible. In a more applicable way, this paper (http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/00221686.2010.9641251)
simulates different cases with and without acknowleding water's compressibility, turns out both sides are showing similar predictions.
-
;D ;D Gee, looks like someone wasn't empty-headed enough for Sceppy! ;D ;D
He's gone off in a huff (again) at the suggestion of something scientific.
Maybe a bit of CBT is in order. Probably Humble_Scientist could offer some advice! But we haven't seen him for 6 weeks or so!
Maybe he's gone off in a huff too!
-
I have an experiment for you, a test, or a thought experiment, taking a pinball machine and place it in a vacuum chamber set up so I can be operated from outside the vacuum chamber.
Before evacuating pull the lever and let go, of course, this pinball machine operates normally.
We evacuate the chamber to 50% of its capabilities,
We pulled lever and let it go, do we see any change in the operation of the pinball machine?
The ball moving 50% faster?
The ball moving 50% slower?
No visible change?
We now evacuate the chamber to maximum capacity.
We pulled lever and let it go, do we see any change in the operation of the pinball machine?
According to what you said above the ball would not leave the channel or even move away from the plunger: not happening, with only the drag of the surface I can see the ball actually going faster, just slightly.
Let's make this simpler because it's SPACE that we're dealing with, with you people.
Put your pinball machine in space then try and pull the LEVER. The operative word is LEVER.
What happens?
When you pull back the lever you also pull back the pin ball machine. Effectively your lever cannot pull.
Now let's use the other scenario that you might come up with.
Imagine the person pulls the lever whilst holding the pin ball machine with their other hand in order to be able to pull back on that spring lever. Ok, let's have that.
What happens?
The lever gets pulled back but the ball bearing stays put. It cannot roll down towards the lever as it's pulled back because there is no up or down in your space, so no gradient to roll.
No I am trying to understand your (den pressure) and how it produces weight, when something is placed into a vacuum chamber and you remove atmospheric pressure, the object should weigh less but this does not happen. P.S. At sea level.
As for the pinball machine in weightless environment, in free fall or orbit which ever one you prefer. When the lever is released it goes past it's resting point, hitting the ball, the path of the ball would be hard to predict, since we have not tested a pinball machine in a weightless environment the ball may take a long time for it to come to a rest, since some of the bumpers actually accelerate the ball. May even hit the glass that time.
-
left axis, as pressure increases, eventually liquid turns to solid, no matter what temperature.
Ok then. I'll leave that with you. This is my last post on here, so I hope you find what you're looking for with the forum and enjoy.
:)
Huh, did I just see that sceptimatic saw a phase diagram and freaked out? Just as well you didn't show him a pourbaix diagram or eutectic mix.
I think even Venn diagrams would freak scepti out.
-
;D ;D Gee, looks like someone wasn't empty-headed enough for Sceppy! ;D ;D
He's gone off in a huff (again) at the suggestion of something scientific.
Maybe a bit of CBT is in order. Probably Humble_Scientist could offer some advice! But we haven't seen him for 6 weeks or so!
Maybe he's gone off in a huff too!
Was that meant for me? Haha nice one. I'm just stating how close liquid water is on being incompressible while also citing the sources. Anyway, scepti is the star of the show here, and the questions remain. Why air is denser at the bottom and why denser liquid goes to the bottom according to scepti's physics theory? Or I'd rather say that scepti has no idea and his physics theory is a total BS, until proven otherwise.