If I jump in the air why doesn't the ground move @ 1000MPH?

Yes a barometer measures atmospheric pressure. Was anybody disagreeing about this?

No. I'm just making sure that it cannot be used when you find out I'm correct.

Quote from: sceptimatic on January 11, 2014, 07:51:12 AM

Excellent idea. Now we know that it measures atmospheric pressure and not gravity, right? or inertia. Are we settled on this?

Nobody here ever said that a barometer measured gravity or inertia.  You must be hallucinating LOL.

I never said they did. I'm just making sure it cannot be used when you find out that this experiment will prove I am correct.

Go for it scepti. No better way to find out you are wrong then seeing it for yourself.

Go for it scepti. No better way to find out you are wrong then seeing it for yourself.

I intend to. I'd like for anyone to do it, as it's not just to satisfy myself, you all want the truth don't you? so try it yourselves as well.

Quote from: ausGeoff on January 11, 2014, 07:50:52 AM

Quote from: sceptimatic on January 11, 2014, 07:42:46 AM

Until you accept that gravity and inertia are a scientific lie, you will never get to grips with reality.

Can you please post some viable evidence that supports your viewpoint that gravity and inertia do not exist?

Or, can you give us the names of any accredited scientists who also hold this view?

And what, precisely, has led you to the opinion that these two theories are "lies"?  Any documentation?  Any YouTube links?

Rottingroom and anyone else can prove it by using a barometer.

Two barometers would be better inside a car or a bus or whatever.

One on the dashboard and one at the back of the vehicle.
All that needs to be done is for someone to watch the changes in pressure.

Here's what should happen.
On immediate acceleration...the barometer at the front should register a very quick low pressure.
The one at the back should register a higher pressure.
If someone could do a steady acceleration around a track or very long road, you should see a steady increase in barometric pressure at the back of the vehicle.

Now slow down and the opposite should happen.
It's an excellent experiment.

I predict that under steady acceleration, the barometric pressure at the back will increase, but stop increasing, and stay slightly higher than the pressure at the front.  the force between air molecules under acceleration will balance with the force the bus is applying to the air and the pressure will stop increasing.  Make the bus accelerate more, and the pressure will increase again, but then stop increasing fairly quickly, as the forces balance once again.  Have the bus brake suddenly, and the pressure at the front will rise and exceed the pressure at the back, since the direction of acceleration as reversed.

To understand it..a person MUST never be shy of looking into the alternatives and must never be intimidated to the point of just following the larger number because it's less hassle.
You all have a brain and it's inside your own skull, which makes you independent in thought, so use it and question this stuff seriously and come to your OWN conclusions, no matter how much questioning it takes.

Don't just accept things on face value because you think fits and you think everything works because they told you so....use your brain.

Well said.

Quote from: sceptimatic on January 11, 2014, 07:57:19 AM

Quote from: ausGeoff on January 11, 2014, 07:50:52 AM

Quote from: sceptimatic on January 11, 2014, 07:42:46 AM

Until you accept that gravity and inertia are a scientific lie, you will never get to grips with reality.

Can you please post some viable evidence that supports your viewpoint that gravity and inertia do not exist?

Or, can you give us the names of any accredited scientists who also hold this view?

And what, precisely, has led you to the opinion that these two theories are "lies"?  Any documentation?  Any YouTube links?

Rottingroom and anyone else can prove it by using a barometer.

Two barometers would be better inside a car or a bus or whatever.

One on the dashboard and one at the back of the vehicle.
All that needs to be done is for someone to watch the changes in pressure.

Here's what should happen.
On immediate acceleration...the barometer at the front should register a very quick low pressure.
The one at the back should register a higher pressure.
If someone could do a steady acceleration around a track or very long road, you should see a steady increase in barometric pressure at the back of the vehicle.

Now slow down and the opposite should happen.
It's an excellent experiment.

I predict that under steady acceleration, the barometric pressure at the back will increase, but stop increasing, and stay slightly higher than the pressure at the front.  the force between air molecules under acceleration will balance with the force the bus is applying to the air and the pressure will stop increasing.  Make the bus accelerate more, and the pressure will increase again, but then stop increasing fairly quickly, as the forces balance once again.  Have the bus brake suddenly, and the pressure at the front will rise and exceed the pressure at the back, since the direction of acceleration as reversed.

Which is what Iv'e just said. Which if it works, it disproves gravity and inertia and proves that atmospheric pressure is responsible as I said it was.

Oh dear.....

I must admit it's very difficult to argue against "logic" such as this.....

Quote

I'm maintaining they do not exist because they do not exist.

I'd really love to see sceptimatic in a court of law defending himself against a charge of armed robbery.

"No your honour; I didn't steal that million bucks from the bank".

"OK sceptimatic; that's good enough for me.  Off you go".

Horrible example.  Please tell us how you can prove something doesn't exist if it doesn't exist? All you have is a person's word.

It's an excellent experiment.

Sorry, but it's a silly and ultimately pointless experiment.  You do know that barometers takes maybe an hour to record any changes in atmospheric pressure don't you?  And that any instant, minute change in pressure won't affect your average barometer noticeably—say like 1010hPa to 1012hPa.

Quote from: sceptimatic on January 11, 2014, 07:57:19 AM

It's an excellent experiment.

Sorry, but it's a silly and ultimately pointless experiment.  You do know that barometers takes maybe an hour to record any changes in atmospheric pressure don't you?  And that any instant, minute change in pressure won't affect your average barometer noticeably—say like 1010hPa to 1012hPa.

Under normal circumstance, yes...but we are operating under hugely different circumstances and pressure, so they will be a change.
Are you after the truth or here to dilute or misdirect it, because it appears you are here to simply make sure the truth gets stifled.
The genuine people will test this out. The shills will expend as much energy as needed to find a way out of it.

You're still confusing weight with mass,  They're two totally different things.  In a scientific context, mass refers to the amount of "matter" in an object,  whereas weight refers to the force experienced by an object due to gravity.

That force is AIR PRESSURE.

I predict that under steady acceleration, the barometric pressure at the back will increase, but stop increasing, and stay slightly higher than the pressure at the front.  the force between air molecules under acceleration will balance with the force the bus is applying to the air and the pressure will stop increasing.  Make the bus accelerate more, and the pressure will increase again, but then stop increasing fairly quickly, as the forces balance once again.  Have the bus brake suddenly, and the pressure at the front will rise and exceed the pressure at the back, since the direction of acceleration as reversed.

Sorry, but your "predictions" are totally incorrect.

The bus is not sealed form the outside air, therefore the pressure inside the bus cannot vary from normal atmospheric air pressure outside of the bus.  Additionally, you couldn't have two areas inside the bus—even if it were sealed—registering two different pressure levels.

Quote from: Nolhekh on January 11, 2014, 08:07:17 AM

Quote from: sceptimatic on January 11, 2014, 07:57:19 AM

Quote from: ausGeoff on January 11, 2014, 07:50:52 AM

Quote from: sceptimatic on January 11, 2014, 07:42:46 AM

Until you accept that gravity and inertia are a scientific lie, you will never get to grips with reality.

Can you please post some viable evidence that supports your viewpoint that gravity and inertia do not exist?

Or, can you give us the names of any accredited scientists who also hold this view?

And what, precisely, has led you to the opinion that these two theories are "lies"?  Any documentation?  Any YouTube links?

Rottingroom and anyone else can prove it by using a barometer.

Two barometers would be better inside a car or a bus or whatever.

One on the dashboard and one at the back of the vehicle.
All that needs to be done is for someone to watch the changes in pressure.

Here's what should happen.
On immediate acceleration...the barometer at the front should register a very quick low pressure.
The one at the back should register a higher pressure.
If someone could do a steady acceleration around a track or very long road, you should see a steady increase in barometric pressure at the back of the vehicle.

Now slow down and the opposite should happen.
It's an excellent experiment.

I predict that under steady acceleration, the barometric pressure at the back will increase, but stop increasing, and stay slightly higher than the pressure at the front.  the force between air molecules under acceleration will balance with the force the bus is applying to the air and the pressure will stop increasing.  Make the bus accelerate more, and the pressure will increase again, but then stop increasing fairly quickly, as the forces balance once again.  Have the bus brake suddenly, and the pressure at the front will rise and exceed the pressure at the back, since the direction of acceleration as reversed.

Which is what Iv'e just said. Which if it works, it disproves gravity and inertia and proves that atmospheric pressure is responsible as I said it was.

Not quite.  I believe the tendency of matter to stay still or at constant speed and direction (a.k.a. interia) is what causes the high and low pressures in the first place.  So if it works, it actually proves that inertia is a real effect (though not actually a force).  Since gravity acts perpendicular to the motion of a bus, it can't affect your results, and so can't be proved or dis-proved with this experiment.

So your entire knowledge base is built upon your personal interpretation of "pub talk" and "media fantasies"?
Gee... what a fabulous scientific education.  Why did I waste all those years at university when I could have learned everything by reading the local rag over a pint at my local pub?
Silly me.

Ever wonder WHY people pay to go to college?  It's a business, that's why.  True knowledge is FREE.

Quote from: sceptimatic on January 11, 2014, 06:08:50 AM

I'd love to answer what you put but I don't see the point when you actually believe that there is NO FORCE at all and things just happen.

This will possibly make little sense to you, but here goes.  I'm standing in that bus, and it's velocity is constant at 35mph, and it's travelling in a straight line.  I'm holding a tennis ball.

I throw that ball upwards a couple of feet, and catch it.

The one and ONLY force acting on that ball whilst it's in the air is the force of gravity.

(The bus could be travelling at 100mph or 5mph, or it could be accelerating or decelerating.  Doesn't make any difference to the ball.)

Absolutely WRONG!  The other force is motion.  The ball is moving at the same speed as the bus.

Quote from: Nolhekh on January 11, 2014, 08:07:17 AM

I predict that under steady acceleration, the barometric pressure at the back will increase, but stop increasing, and stay slightly higher than the pressure at the front.  the force between air molecules under acceleration will balance with the force the bus is applying to the air and the pressure will stop increasing.  Make the bus accelerate more, and the pressure will increase again, but then stop increasing fairly quickly, as the forces balance once again.  Have the bus brake suddenly, and the pressure at the front will rise and exceed the pressure at the back, since the direction of acceleration as reversed.

Sorry, but your "predictions" are totally incorrect.

The bus is not sealed form the outside air, therefore the pressure inside the bus cannot vary from normal atmospheric air pressure outside of the bus.  Additionally, you couldn't have two areas inside the bus—even if it were sealed—registering two different pressure levels.

Sorry, but they are correct.  The back wall of the bus will apply force to the air molecules in front of it, causing that air to in turn apply force to the next set of molecules.  The inertia of all the molecules in the bus will resist this force and compress the molecules at the back, while leaving an area of low pressure at the front of the bus.  Indeed air can come in from outside the bus and dampen these effects, but they can't eliminate them altogether.

Quote from: Nolhekh on January 11, 2014, 08:07:17 AM

I predict that under steady acceleration, the barometric pressure at the back will increase, but stop increasing, and stay slightly higher than the pressure at the front.  the force between air molecules under acceleration will balance with the force the bus is applying to the air and the pressure will stop increasing.  Make the bus accelerate more, and the pressure will increase again, but then stop increasing fairly quickly, as the forces balance once again.  Have the bus brake suddenly, and the pressure at the front will rise and exceed the pressure at the back, since the direction of acceleration as reversed.

Sorry, but your "predictions" are totally incorrect.

The bus is not sealed form the outside air, therefore the pressure inside the bus cannot vary from normal atmospheric air pressure outside of the bus.  Additionally, you couldn't have two areas inside the bus—even if it were sealed—registering two different pressure levels.

Yes you can but it's so quick , people misconstrue it as gravity and inertia, two made up words to describe the real reality of what is happening.
Everything that happens on earth...every movement by anything, creates high versus low pressure, it cannot happen any other way.
Density against pressure in movement, will always create  a lower pressure that immediately tries to equalize in super quick time. It's no different to diving in water.
As soon as your head hits the water, your body moves it our of the way and the water immediately fills the area you pushed aside. You created a high pressure with your head and shoulders and that pressure is pushed around you to fill the gap and so on until your feet disappear into the water and it closes up.
Now think of that as a bus going at speed of ACCELERATION through it and still going. It's mass displaces the water it is in and also forces the water in front to push around it.

I'm waiting for the " but water doesn't compress" answer. Please don't, it just makes you look desperate.

Well said.

It may be well said, but it's a pity sceptimatic doesn't follow his own advice.

The thing is that sceptis explanations have relied on the back of the bus to stop the air from going back and compressing the air in the back. If you placed a ball by the drivers seat and placed another on the roof of the bus above the drivers seat then both balls would behave the same way. They would both roll back to the back of the bus in the same way.

Under normal circumstance, yes...but we are operating under hugely different circumstances and pressure, so they will be a change.

And what, precisely, are those hugely different circumstances?  We're all talking about normal and identical  atmospheric pressure at ground level inside a bus and outside a bus?

Are you after the truth or here to dilute or misdirect it, because it appears you are here to simply make sure the truth gets stifled.

Oh dear.  Backed into a corner, and the ad hominem attacks start.  Pathetic.

The genuine people will test this out. The shills will expend as much energy as needed to find a way out of it.

And this possibly explains why not one person on this forum agrees substantially with anything you're saying LOL.

I've got a question for scepti. According to the flat earth theory, the Earth is constantly accelerating (i.e., not moving at a constant velocity) upward at 9.8 m/s˛. Is this correct?

EDIT: grammar adjustment

Quote from: ausGeoff on January 11, 2014, 06:35:06 AM

Quote from: sceptimatic on January 11, 2014, 06:08:50 AM

I'd love to answer what you put but I don't see the point when you actually believe that there is NO FORCE at all and things just happen.

This will possibly make little sense to you, but here goes.  I'm standing in that bus, and it's velocity is constant at 35mph, and it's travelling in a straight line.  I'm holding a tennis ball.

I throw that ball upwards a couple of feet, and catch it.

The one and ONLY force acting on that ball whilst it's in the air is the force of gravity.

(The bus could be travelling at 100mph or 5mph, or it could be accelerating or decelerating.  Doesn't make any difference to the ball.)

Absolutely WRONG!  The other force is motion.  The ball is moving at the same speed as the bus.

constant motion itself is not a force.  Force causes acceleration.  If there is no acceleration, then there is no force or balanced force.  A bouncing ball in a moving bus only has its vertical speed changing.  The horizontal speed is not.  Therefore the only net force on the ball is vertical.  The only vertical forces the ball can encounter are gravity, and a tiny bit if air resistance.  If you're a flat earther, then there are no forces at all on the ball, and the thing that's accelerating vetically is the vehicle, and the air inside it.

Quote from: sceptimatic on January 11, 2014, 08:11:47 AM

Quote from: Nolhekh on January 11, 2014, 08:07:17 AM

Quote from: sceptimatic on January 11, 2014, 07:57:19 AM

Quote from: ausGeoff on January 11, 2014, 07:50:52 AM

Quote from: sceptimatic on January 11, 2014, 07:42:46 AM

Until you accept that gravity and inertia are a scientific lie, you will never get to grips with reality.

Can you please post some viable evidence that supports your viewpoint that gravity and inertia do not exist?

Or, can you give us the names of any accredited scientists who also hold this view?

And what, precisely, has led you to the opinion that these two theories are "lies"?  Any documentation?  Any YouTube links?

Rottingroom and anyone else can prove it by using a barometer.

Two barometers would be better inside a car or a bus or whatever.

One on the dashboard and one at the back of the vehicle.
All that needs to be done is for someone to watch the changes in pressure.

Here's what should happen.
On immediate acceleration...the barometer at the front should register a very quick low pressure.
The one at the back should register a higher pressure.
If someone could do a steady acceleration around a track or very long road, you should see a steady increase in barometric pressure at the back of the vehicle.

Now slow down and the opposite should happen.
It's an excellent experiment.

I predict that under steady acceleration, the barometric pressure at the back will increase, but stop increasing, and stay slightly higher than the pressure at the front.  the force between air molecules under acceleration will balance with the force the bus is applying to the air and the pressure will stop increasing.  Make the bus accelerate more, and the pressure will increase again, but then stop increasing fairly quickly, as the forces balance once again.  Have the bus brake suddenly, and the pressure at the front will rise and exceed the pressure at the back, since the direction of acceleration as reversed.

Which is what Iv'e just said. Which if it works, it disproves gravity and inertia and proves that atmospheric pressure is responsible as I said it was.

Not quite.  I believe the tendency of matter to stay still or at constant speed and direction (a.k.a. interia) is what causes the high and low pressures in the first place.  So if it works, it actually proves that inertia is a real effect (though not actually a force).  Since gravity acts perpendicular to the motion of a bus, it can't affect your results, and so can't be proved or dis-proved with this experiment.

If you have to hang onto something..hang onto it for dear life. Enjoy the rest of your life, because if you can't see the truth then you don't want to, for whatever reasons.

Ever wonder WHY people pay to go to college?  It's a business, that's why.  True knowledge is FREE.

Nope.  People pay money to go to college because the information they learn there is far, far better than pub gossip or media beat-ups.  Simple.

The thing is that sceptis explanations have relied on the back of the bus to stop the air from going back and compressing the air in the back. If you placed a ball by the drivers seat and placed another on the roof of the bus above the drivers seat then both balls would behave the same way. They would both roll back to the back of the bus in the same way.

You know the reason for this and you are much much smarter than this. Would you like to find the truth or are you happy in acceptance of what's been given to you?

Quote from: rottingroom on January 11, 2014, 08:31:06 AM

The thing is that sceptis explanations have relied on the back of the bus to stop the air from going back and compressing the air in the back. If you placed a ball by the drivers seat and placed another on the roof of the bus above the drivers seat then both balls would behave the same way. They would both roll back to the back of the bus in the same way.

You know the reason for this and you are much much smarter than this. Would you like to find the truth or are you happy in acceptance of what's been given to you?

Do yourself a favor and direct that question at yourself.

I've got a question for scepti. According to the Flat Earth theory, the Earth is constantly accelerating (i.e., not moving at a constant velocity) upward at 9.8 m/s˛. Is this correct?

Not in my world it's not. I don't follow the flat earth model in it's entirety. This being one. I follow the slight concave model with a dome.
My earth is a cell in suspended animation of darkness of what people refer to as space, meaning it does not exist.
Everything you see in the sky that is not man made, are reflections of what's happening inside this earth.

Absolutely WRONG!  The other force is motion.  The ball is moving at the same speed as the bus.

Oh dear.  Motion as you call it—or more correctly velocity—is not a "force".  It's a ratio of distance versus time.  As in 35 miles per hour.

And of course the ball is moving at the same speed as the bus relative to the roadway.  Where did I say otherwise?  I didn't.

Quote from: TPMS on January 11, 2014, 08:32:23 AM

I've got a question for scepti. According to the Flat Earth theory, the Earth is constantly accelerating (i.e., not moving at a constant velocity) upward at 9.8 m/s˛. Is this correct?

Not in my world it's not. I don't follow the flat earth model in it's entirety. This being one. I follow the slight concave model with a dome.
My earth is a cell in suspended animation of darkness of what people refer to as space, meaning it does not exist.
Everything you see in the sky that is not man made, are reflections of what's happening inside this earth.

Okay, then I won't continue with my question on the Earth accelerating upward. I've got another question: In what direction(s) does air pressure apply to an object (using terms such as up, down, to the sides, and so on)?

Nope again!  The path of the ball has nothing whatsoever to do with either the velocity or the acceleration of the van.  Until you can understand and accept that gravity is the ONLY force acting on the ball in mid-air, you'll never come to grips with the physics of this scenario.

constant motion itself is not a force.  Force causes acceleration.  If there is no acceleration, then there is no force or balanced force.  A bouncing ball in a moving bus only has its vertical speed changing.  The horizontal speed is not.  Therefore the only net force on the ball is vertical.  The only vertical forces the ball can encounter are gravity, and a tiny bit if air resistance.  If you're a flat earther, then there are no forces at all on the ball, and the thing that's accelerating vetically is the vehicle, and the air inside it.

You both say essentially the same thing here.  So please tell us why SEs use the explanation of the atmosphere moving WITH the Earth as it supposedly spins.