Can anyone answer this question.

  • 908 Replies
  • 162954 Views
?

rottingroom

  • 4785
  • Around the world.
Re: Can anyone answer this question.
« Reply #360 on: October 19, 2013, 11:36:36 AM »
Of course it is theoretical. It is called "the theory of general relativity." It is the title of Einsteins paper after all. To this day however, it has not been proven false while attributing the phenomena we call gravity to pressure is easily dismissable with a barometer. General Relativity is a solid theory, backed with mountains of evidence.

As much as it pains me, I'll be inclined to agree with scepti about general relativity.
General relativity fails to explain anything really.
It basically says that a theoretical conceptual analogy (space-time) is creating gravity.
I for one cannot force myself to subscribe to such a fallacy, for space-time is not physically manifested.
As for special relativity, Tesla pretty much disproved that as well.
The faster-than-light scalar or longitudinal waves Tesla used to magnify and wireless-ly transmit power were able to travel up to ((Pi/2)*(c)) through a solid medium or otherwise.
Einstein was treated and adorned as a celebrity, while the public and the media shunned Tesla and scrapped his ideas.

space-time is a theory? It is simply a 4 dimensional representation of 2 things. The 3 dimensions of space plus the dimension of time. This is hardly a disputable concept.

Also, it is not saying that space-time creates gravity. It is saying that mass affects spacetime and gravity is the result of that.

If you don't understand what proofs there are for this allow me to highlight what I consider to be conclusive proof.

Look up gravitational lensing and look at these pictures.









Tesla is highly revered by the way.


*

sceptimatic

  • Flat Earth Scientist
  • 30059
Re: Can anyone answer this question.
« Reply #361 on: October 19, 2013, 11:43:41 AM »
I'm not one that can be intimidated and I certainly will not follow protocol. I will, however, follow my own thoughts until they do not stand up to the test.

I won't discuss it in this topic. If you are desperate to know, then stick a topic up about it.

No desperation here, this is just a validation of your double standard. You are right until tests prove you are wrong but you will never do these tests. Ergo you are always right, but still open minded of course. How convenient.
Well that's just the way it is with me.
When someone can  prove me wrong, where I have to question what I think, then I will surely take note. I have seen nothing to do that yet. All I see is, little digs and being told I'm wrong. That doesn't cut it and certainly does not make any of you, any credible scientists simply by using scientific words and copied, shoe horned equations.

You see, your stance, as well as others, is....you are right until tests prove you wrong, so there's a sort of stalemate there.
Just because you were pre fed your theories, does not make them especially credible, in what we are discussing.
It's not my stance. I'm not claiming something here. You are doing such a thing. Your task is to give some evidence so we may discuss about the results, not about your stories.
Please give me an honest answer : Why don't you want to do any kind of experiment?
The very same reason why you don't want to give me an experiment. Because there isn't one that can directly prove either theories.
Again, it's your duty to find an experiment to prove your "theory".  It's too easy to say, "there is none", you keep it in your safe zone.
...You are claiming that your "theory" is as valid as the gravitation one. That's not enough, prove it. Give the relationship between weight and mass. I may recall you that you said the weight was tightly related to atmospheric pressure. Find an experiment involving pressure changes and note the weight variation. Why don't you do this ?
I could prove it but it would require a sky scraper and I'm clean out of them where I live. Any where you live?

?

rottingroom

  • 4785
  • Around the world.
Re: Can anyone answer this question.
« Reply #362 on: October 19, 2013, 11:45:25 AM »
You'd use a skyscraper to prove what and how?

Re: Can anyone answer this question.
« Reply #363 on: October 19, 2013, 11:50:00 AM »
I'm not one that can be intimidated and I certainly will not follow protocol. I will, however, follow my own thoughts until they do not stand up to the test.

I won't discuss it in this topic. If you are desperate to know, then stick a topic up about it.

No desperation here, this is just a validation of your double standard. You are right until tests prove you are wrong but you will never do these tests. Ergo you are always right, but still open minded of course. How convenient.
Well that's just the way it is with me.
When someone can  prove me wrong, where I have to question what I think, then I will surely take note. I have seen nothing to do that yet. All I see is, little digs and being told I'm wrong. That doesn't cut it and certainly does not make any of you, any credible scientists simply by using scientific words and copied, shoe horned equations.

You see, your stance, as well as others, is....you are right until tests prove you wrong, so there's a sort of stalemate there.
Just because you were pre fed your theories, does not make them especially credible, in what we are discussing.
It's not my stance. I'm not claiming something here. You are doing such a thing. Your task is to give some evidence so we may discuss about the results, not about your stories.
Please give me an honest answer : Why don't you want to do any kind of experiment?
The very same reason why you don't want to give me an experiment. Because there isn't one that can directly prove either theories.
Again, it's your duty to find an experiment to prove your "theory".  It's too easy to say, "there is none", you keep it in your safe zone.
...You are claiming that your "theory" is as valid as the gravitation one. That's not enough, prove it. Give the relationship between weight and mass. I may recall you that you said the weight was tightly related to atmospheric pressure. Find an experiment involving pressure changes and note the weight variation. Why don't you do this ?
I could prove it but it would require a sky scraper and I'm clean out of them where I live. Any where you live?
Nice try.It's your "theory" and your experiences, not mine. Last time you said you needed a mountain, that's was funny too.
Take your pristine Harley Davidson, and go for a little trip. You surely will find some nice places to try your experiments. Or you may find another way to change pressure at home.

*

sceptimatic

  • Flat Earth Scientist
  • 30059
Re: Can anyone answer this question.
« Reply #364 on: October 19, 2013, 11:56:27 AM »
You'd use a skyscraper to prove what and how?
To prove that it's atmospheric pressure that acts upon an object that can make it appear lighter or heavier.

?

rottingroom

  • 4785
  • Around the world.
Re: Can anyone answer this question.
« Reply #365 on: October 19, 2013, 11:59:10 AM »
You'd use a skyscraper to prove what and how?
To prove that it's atmospheric pressure that acts upon an object that can make it appear lighter or heavier.

That sounds like a famous experiment performed by a famous scientist that actually proves the opposite of what you suggest.

Re: Can anyone answer this question.
« Reply #366 on: October 19, 2013, 12:00:39 PM »
You are still going to see light when travelling at any speed if you are heading towards it. Going away from  it is a different matter as the light will fade to nothing from your sight.
Still hoping to hear of some evidence too of someone witnessing this.

?

Pyrolizard

  • 699
  • The Militant Skeptic
Re: Can anyone answer this question.
« Reply #367 on: October 19, 2013, 12:00:57 PM »
You'd use a skyscraper to prove what and how?
To prove that it's atmospheric pressure that acts upon an object that can make it appear lighter or heavier.

All you'd be potentially proving is the inverse square law.  Get a bell jar, measure it at the same elevation so as to be consistent.
Quote from: Shmeggley
Wherever someone is wrong on the internet, Pyrolizard will be there!

Quote from: Excelsior John
I dont care about the majority I care about Obama.
Let it always be known that Excelsior John is against democracy.

?

Pyrolizard

  • 699
  • The Militant Skeptic
Re: Can anyone answer this question.
« Reply #368 on: October 19, 2013, 12:02:38 PM »
You are still going to see light when travelling at any speed if you are heading towards it. Going away from  it is a different matter as the light will fade to nothing from your sight.
Still hoping to hear of some evidence too of someone witnessing this.
Along with the nearly one hundred eighty degree field of view that would occur if traveling near scepti's hypothetical speed of light.
Quote from: Shmeggley
Wherever someone is wrong on the internet, Pyrolizard will be there!

Quote from: Excelsior John
I dont care about the majority I care about Obama.
Let it always be known that Excelsior John is against democracy.

*

th3rm0m3t3r0

  • At least 3 words, please.
  • 4696
  • It's SCIENCE!
Re: Can anyone answer this question.
« Reply #369 on: October 19, 2013, 12:10:43 PM »
Of course it is theoretical. It is called "the theory of general relativity." It is the title of Einsteins paper after all. To this day however, it has not been proven false while attributing the phenomena we call gravity to pressure is easily dismissable with a barometer. General Relativity is a solid theory, backed with mountains of evidence.

As much as it pains me, I'll be inclined to agree with scepti about general relativity.
General relativity fails to explain anything really.
It basically says that a theoretical conceptual analogy (space-time) is creating gravity.
I for one cannot force myself to subscribe to such a fallacy, for space-time is not physically manifested.
As for special relativity, Tesla pretty much disproved that as well.
The faster-than-light scalar or longitudinal waves Tesla used to magnify and wireless-ly transmit power were able to travel up to ((Pi/2)*(c)) through a solid medium or otherwise.
Einstein was treated and adorned as a celebrity, while the public and the media shunned Tesla and scrapped his ideas.

space-time is a theory? It is simply a 4 dimensional representation of 2 things. The 3 dimensions of space plus the dimension of time. This is hardly a disputable concept.

Also, it is not saying that space-time creates gravity. It is saying that mass affects spacetime and gravity is the result of that.

If you don't understand what proofs there are for this allow me to highlight what I consider to be conclusive proof.

Look up gravitational lensing and look at these pictures.









Tesla is highly revered by the way.
I'm not trying to debate the existence of gravity.
I'm saying that general relativity is not a satisfactory way to describe what it is.
I believe that Tesla was the smartest most innovative man to ever live.
But, greed accepted Einstein and Edison more.
Space-time is a concept.
It doesn't really exist.
There is no fabric for mass to dent.
I understand how general relativity works.
On a side note : Tesla strongly disagreed with general relativity.
On a side-side note : I changed my poor word choice from "creating" to "responsible for".
« Last Edit: October 19, 2013, 12:16:25 PM by th3rm0m3t3r0 »


I don't profess to be correct.
Quote from: sceptimatic
I am correct.

?

rottingroom

  • 4785
  • Around the world.
Re: Can anyone answer this question.
« Reply #370 on: October 19, 2013, 12:18:48 PM »
Saying space time doesn't exist is nonsense. It's a specific location at a specific time. Nothing more. I don't know what complicated ideas you have in your head about what that is, but it's not that. Einstein adds the dimension of time to the dimensions of space for good cause. His theory proposed that time was also influenced by gravitational fields. So unifying space and time was necessary to make this theory complete. This here too is another provable aspect of GR as time is indeed affected by gravity.

*

th3rm0m3t3r0

  • At least 3 words, please.
  • 4696
  • It's SCIENCE!
Re: Can anyone answer this question.
« Reply #371 on: October 19, 2013, 12:26:41 PM »
Saying space time doesn't exist is nonsense. It's a specific location at a specific time. Nothing more. I don't know what complicated ideas you have in your head about what that is, but it's not that. Einstein adds the dimension of time to the dimensions of space for good cause. His theory proposed that time was also influenced by gravitational fields. So unifying space and time was necessary to make this theory complete. This here too is another provable aspect of GR as time is indeed affected by gravity.

It's an idea.
General relativity says that an idea is responsible for gravity.
I don't buy it.


I don't profess to be correct.
Quote from: sceptimatic
I am correct.

?

rottingroom

  • 4785
  • Around the world.
Re: Can anyone answer this question.
« Reply #372 on: October 19, 2013, 12:32:57 PM »
Saying space time doesn't exist is nonsense. It's a specific location at a specific time. Nothing more. I don't know what complicated ideas you have in your head about what that is, but it's not that. Einstein adds the dimension of time to the dimensions of space for good cause. His theory proposed that time was also influenced by gravitational fields. So unifying space and time was necessary to make this theory complete. This here too is another provable aspect of GR as time is indeed affected by gravity.

It's an idea.
General relativity says that an idea is responsible for gravity.
I don't buy it.

An idea is responsible for gravity? What are you talking about? General Relativity describes the mechanism of how apparent gravitational effects actually occur. You don't seem to understand it at all.

*

th3rm0m3t3r0

  • At least 3 words, please.
  • 4696
  • It's SCIENCE!
Re: Can anyone answer this question.
« Reply #373 on: October 19, 2013, 01:09:05 PM »



space-time is a theory? It is simply a 4 dimensional representation of 2 things. The 3 dimensions of space plus the dimension of time. This is hardly a disputable concept.



The key word here being concept.
I hate to sound like an FE'er, but use your head, man.


I don't profess to be correct.
Quote from: sceptimatic
I am correct.

Re: Can anyone answer this question.
« Reply #374 on: October 19, 2013, 01:12:27 PM »
You'd use a skyscraper to prove what and how?
To prove that it's atmospheric pressure that acts upon an object that can make it appear lighter or heavier.
So one would just need to reduce the air pressure on an object and see if it weighs less? 

?

rottingroom

  • 4785
  • Around the world.
Re: Can anyone answer this question.
« Reply #375 on: October 19, 2013, 01:14:29 PM »



space-time is a theory? It is simply a 4 dimensional representation of 2 things. The 3 dimensions of space plus the dimension of time. This is hardly a disputable concept.



The key word here being concept.
I hate to sound like an FE'er, but use your head, man.

Oh you definitely sound like one right now. Let me ask you. Do you believe in space and that that space consists of three dimensions?

Now, do you believe that you can describe events using a 4th dimension of time?

Do you think that if I talk to you about an event in history at a particular time I would use the time when it happened and the location that it happened?

This is not a revolutionary idea. It is location + time.

*

sceptimatic

  • Flat Earth Scientist
  • 30059
Re: Can anyone answer this question.
« Reply #376 on: October 19, 2013, 03:17:00 PM »
You'd use a skyscraper to prove what and how?
To prove that it's atmospheric pressure that acts upon an object that can make it appear lighter or heavier.
So one would just need to reduce the air pressure on an object and see if it weighs less?
No, this is where it becomes difficult and has to be done the right way.
Measuring a weight at sea level and then carrying the scales and weighted object up a sky scraper to measure again will produce a marginal effect, making it appear that the weighted object is slightly lighter at that height if the scales are not calibrated and it has to be done properly to show that weight would not physically change.

The only way it can be done is to have two identical sets of scales (preferably digital)  with one calibrated to zero at sea level and the other one calibrated on the roof of the sky scraper to zero. This way, only the object itself will have it's own effect at both levels on those two scales.

I don't have a sky scraper near me to try it.

Re: Can anyone answer this question.
« Reply #377 on: October 19, 2013, 03:28:35 PM »
Next time you have some gold to sell, you might want to take this into consideration.  You might get more money weighing it at sea level.

Re: Can anyone answer this question.
« Reply #378 on: October 19, 2013, 06:32:28 PM »
So one would just need to reduce the air pressure on an object and see if it weighs less?
No, this is where it becomes difficult and has to be done the right way.
Measuring a weight at sea level and then carrying the scales and weighted object up a sky scraper to measure again will produce a marginal effect, making it appear that the weighted object is slightly lighter at that height if the scales are not calibrated and it has to be done properly to show that weight would not physically change.
So then don't travel to different elevations.  Use vacuum chamber to get less air pressure.  A weight and a precision scale, one reading at ambient air pressure, and then another at reduced pressure. 

*

sceptimatic

  • Flat Earth Scientist
  • 30059
Re: Can anyone answer this question.
« Reply #379 on: October 19, 2013, 06:36:52 PM »
So one would just need to reduce the air pressure on an object and see if it weighs less?
No, this is where it becomes difficult and has to be done the right way.
Measuring a weight at sea level and then carrying the scales and weighted object up a sky scraper to measure again will produce a marginal effect, making it appear that the weighted object is slightly lighter at that height if the scales are not calibrated and it has to be done properly to show that weight would not physically change.
So then don't travel to different elevations.  Use vacuum chamber to get less air pressure.  A weight and a precision scale, one reading at ambient air pressure, and then another at reduced pressure.
One problem.
How do you calibrate a scale then put it inside a vacuum chamber to extract air and then calibrate again?

At least the sky scraper solves this problem.
« Last Edit: October 19, 2013, 06:51:40 PM by sceptimatic »

?

rottingroom

  • 4785
  • Around the world.
Re: Can anyone answer this question.
« Reply #380 on: October 19, 2013, 06:47:43 PM »
Does it matter? If pressure had an effect on weight then barometers would be an integral part of weighing any object. We would always need to account for this but we never do.

Anyways, before you go dropping things off skyscrapers please make sure you have such an event approved by a city. It could be deadly to people below.

Also, don't be silly like EarthisaSpaceship and compare an index card to another object. You have to pick objects that would have the same amount of friction. You can choose any 2 objects with different densities and weights but you obviously don't want any object that would be subject to Bernoulli's Principle.

Re: Can anyone answer this question.
« Reply #381 on: October 19, 2013, 07:03:19 PM »
Oh, like a feather?
BTW, this isn't fluid dynamics we're talking about.
« Last Edit: October 19, 2013, 07:05:28 PM by EarthIsASpaceship »

*

sceptimatic

  • Flat Earth Scientist
  • 30059
Re: Can anyone answer this question.
« Reply #382 on: October 19, 2013, 07:04:09 PM »
Does it matter? If pressure had an effect on weight then barometers would be an integral part of weighing any object. We would always need to account for this but we never do.
You have a fixation for this barometer, don't you?
Anyways, before you go dropping things off skyscrapers please make sure you have such an event approved by a city. It could be deadly to people below.
Oh, really? and here's me thinking I could just do it, amid rush hour or something.
Also, don't be silly like EarthisaSpaceship and compare an index card to another object. You have to pick objects that would have the same amount of friction. You can choose any 2 objects with different densities and weights but you obviously don't want any object that would be subject to Bernoulli's Principle.
You mean like a sheet of paper, cut to the same size as a credit card, then drop the cut sheet and the credit card and they will fall the same or is this part where it's a case of, " no, no, you can't have that, it has to be something a little heavier"....?

I'll let you briefly explain Bernoulli's principle, seeing as you've already googled. Just a brief and simple explanation will suffice.

Re: Can anyone answer this question.
« Reply #383 on: October 19, 2013, 07:04:49 PM »
So one would just need to reduce the air pressure on an object and see if it weighs less?
No, this is where it becomes difficult and has to be done the right way.
Measuring a weight at sea level and then carrying the scales and weighted object up a sky scraper to measure again will produce a marginal effect, making it appear that the weighted object is slightly lighter at that height if the scales are not calibrated and it has to be done properly to show that weight would not physically change.
So then don't travel to different elevations.  Use vacuum chamber to get less air pressure.  A weight and a precision scale, one reading at ambient air pressure, and then another at reduced pressure.
One problem.
How do you calibrate a scale then put it inside a vacuum chamber to extract air and then calibrate again?

At least the sky scraped solves this problem.

We have a four figure balance in the glove box at my university.  We use it to weigh out extremely reactive substances in a vacuum and it is calibrated by the same weights whether or not it is inside the glove box.  It makes no difference whether it is under the vacuum or if the scales are outside the glove box.

I know you won't believe me but I felt I should chip in because I actually have first hand experience with this.  Furthermore, if you place a calibrated set of these extremely sensitive scales into the glove box (calibrated at atmospheric pressure and reads 0.0000 g when tared) and then apply the vacuum, the scales will stay at 0.000 g the whole way down until the maximum vacuum is reached, which is about 0.1 mbar - that's about 10,000 times less pressure than outside the box.

Conversely, it's also possible to flood the glove box with an inert gas such as argon, which usually results in a pressure greater than atmospheric within the box.  We do this when there is an intention to conduct an experiment within the box but without the desire to have reduced pressure (as many common solvents would simply boil at such reduced pressure).  Just the same way as the scales stay at 0.0000 g as pressure is reduced, it also stays at 0.0000 g as pressure is applied.

Again, you won't believe me, but that's how it is. 

?

rottingroom

  • 4785
  • Around the world.
Re: Can anyone answer this question.
« Reply #384 on: October 19, 2013, 07:08:58 PM »
Barometers measure local pressure. They are very relevant to this discussion.

As far as Bernoulli's principle it is basically the principles of lift, friction and drag.

Mind your googley accusations too. I know all these things because I have a job where I must know things about gravity, pressure, flight and much more. This is why I use a barometer everyday, as I told you earlier.

*

sceptimatic

  • Flat Earth Scientist
  • 30059
Re: Can anyone answer this question.
« Reply #385 on: October 19, 2013, 07:15:15 PM »
So one would just need to reduce the air pressure on an object and see if it weighs less?
No, this is where it becomes difficult and has to be done the right way.
Measuring a weight at sea level and then carrying the scales and weighted object up a sky scraper to measure again will produce a marginal effect, making it appear that the weighted object is slightly lighter at that height if the scales are not calibrated and it has to be done properly to show that weight would not physically change.
So then don't travel to different elevations.  Use vacuum chamber to get less air pressure.  A weight and a precision scale, one reading at ambient air pressure, and then another at reduced pressure.
One problem.
How do you calibrate a scale then put it inside a vacuum chamber to extract air and then calibrate again?

At least the sky scraped solves this problem.

We have a four figure balance in the glove box at my university.  We use it to weigh out extremely reactive substances in a vacuum and it is calibrated by the same weights whether or not it is inside the glove box.  It makes no difference whether it is under the vacuum or if the scales are outside the glove box.

I know you won't believe me but I felt I should chip in because I actually have first hand experience with this.  Furthermore, if you place a calibrated set of these extremely sensitive scales into the glove box (calibrated at atmospheric pressure and reads 0.0000 g when tared) and then apply the vacuum, the scales will stay at 0.000 g the whole way down until the maximum vacuum is reached, which is about 0.1 mbar - that's about 10,000 times less pressure than outside the box.

Conversely, it's also possible to flood the glove box with an inert gas such as argon, which usually results in a pressure greater than atmospheric within the box.  We do this when there is an intention to conduct an experiment within the box but without the desire to have reduced pressure (as many common solvents would simply boil at such reduced pressure).  Just the same way as the scales stay at 0.0000 g as pressure is reduced, it also stays at 0.0000 g as pressure is applied.

Again, you won't believe me, but that's how it is.
The scales may stay at zero but that doesn't mean they will be at zero, only that they say zero.
Why?

Because scales calibrated at sea level atmospheric pressure to read zero, will read zero because the pressure is already bearing down on the plate of the scale in some capacity....BUT...in an evacuated chamber they cannot be calibrated with any accuracy other than guess work, because having them at zero at sea level atmospheric pressure, means they go into the chamber reading zero and once evacuation starts, they will still read zero, yet the pressure on the plate will be marginally released...UNLESS the scale shows that reverse discrepancy, so it can be calibrated from that point on with the gloves that will by that time, look like inflated fingers with little flexibility.

*

sceptimatic

  • Flat Earth Scientist
  • 30059
Re: Can anyone answer this question.
« Reply #386 on: October 19, 2013, 07:18:39 PM »
Barometers measure local pressure. They are very relevant to this discussion.

As far as Bernoulli's principle it is basically the principles of lift, friction and drag.

Mind your googley accusations too. I know all these things because I have a job where I must know things about gravity, pressure, flight and much more. This is why I use a barometer everyday, as I told you earlier.
Yes, yes, I know about your gravity job. I mean, you should be ripping me a new one with this being your job, as I'm just an uneducated simpleton.
Anyway: Use Bernoulli to break apart what I'm saying then and for now put your little barometer back into it's rightful place.

*

Rama Set

  • 6877
  • I am also an engineer
Re: Can anyone answer this question.
« Reply #387 on: October 19, 2013, 07:27:25 PM »
What are you even talking about? Why are you so defensive to barometers?  What is your problem with Bernoulli's Principle?
Aether is the  characteristic of action or inaction of charged  & noncharged particals.

Re: Can anyone answer this question.
« Reply #388 on: October 19, 2013, 07:29:45 PM »
So one would just need to reduce the air pressure on an object and see if it weighs less?
No, this is where it becomes difficult and has to be done the right way.
Measuring a weight at sea level and then carrying the scales and weighted object up a sky scraper to measure again will produce a marginal effect, making it appear that the weighted object is slightly lighter at that height if the scales are not calibrated and it has to be done properly to show that weight would not physically change.
So then don't travel to different elevations.  Use vacuum chamber to get less air pressure.  A weight and a precision scale, one reading at ambient air pressure, and then another at reduced pressure.
One problem.
How do you calibrate a scale then put it inside a vacuum chamber to extract air and then calibrate again?

At least the sky scraped solves this problem.

We have a four figure balance in the glove box at my university.  We use it to weigh out extremely reactive substances in a vacuum and it is calibrated by the same weights whether or not it is inside the glove box.  It makes no difference whether it is under the vacuum or if the scales are outside the glove box.

I know you won't believe me but I felt I should chip in because I actually have first hand experience with this.  Furthermore, if you place a calibrated set of these extremely sensitive scales into the glove box (calibrated at atmospheric pressure and reads 0.0000 g when tared) and then apply the vacuum, the scales will stay at 0.000 g the whole way down until the maximum vacuum is reached, which is about 0.1 mbar - that's about 10,000 times less pressure than outside the box.

Conversely, it's also possible to flood the glove box with an inert gas such as argon, which usually results in a pressure greater than atmospheric within the box.  We do this when there is an intention to conduct an experiment within the box but without the desire to have reduced pressure (as many common solvents would simply boil at such reduced pressure).  Just the same way as the scales stay at 0.0000 g as pressure is reduced, it also stays at 0.0000 g as pressure is applied.

Again, you won't believe me, but that's how it is.
The scales may stay at zero but that doesn't mean they will be at zero, only that they say zero.
Why?

Because scales calibrated at sea level atmospheric pressure to read zero, will read zero because the pressure is already bearing down on the plate of the scale in some capacity....BUT...in an evacuated chamber they cannot be calibrated with any accuracy other than guess work, because having them at zero at sea level atmospheric pressure, means they go into the chamber reading zero and once evacuation starts, they will still read zero, yet the pressure on the plate will be marginally released...UNLESS the scale shows that reverse discrepancy, so it can be calibrated from that point on with the gloves that will by that time, look like inflated fingers with little flexibility.

Yes - the scales can go negative.  If something particularly heavy is on them (say, a 500 ml round-bottomed flask with some chemicals in it) and it is quickly removed, the scale will easily oscillate between negative and positive weights until it reaches zero again for a few moments.

Alternatively, (and I have done this as well), you can 'zero' the balance with something already placed on it (like an empty flask, ready to weigh something into it).  Remove said item, and voila - the scale will go into the negative by exactly whatever the flask weighs.

Honestly Scepti, I'm heavily experienced with this and you're simply wrong.  You won't like that, but you are.

Also, unlike many other things, I do actually have first-hand experience with what I'm talking about and I can 100% verify that pressure has absolutely no bearing on the weight of an object what-so-ever.  There is no guess work - I have literally zeroed the plate before the vacuum is applied (I have done it many times) and when the vacuum is applied, the plate does not drop into the negative.  When I flood the chamber with argon, I must firstly evacuate it of air (so basically put it under vacuum), then I flood it with argon which typically goes to a pressure a little above atmospheric (then I repeat the process twice more to make sure there is no air in there) and the scales will literally sit at zero the whole time (until I place something on the scale).

The 200 g calibration weight (it weighs 200.0000 g exactly) will weigh exactly that regardless of the pressure.  You're just wrong.  If you refuse to believe me then fine.  I can't convince you of the fact we are not encapsulated by a giant ice-dome, I've come to peace with this.  However, if I cannot convince you that pressure has absolutely no bearing on the weight of something, given it is something that I have personally dealt with so many times - then I give up.

*

th3rm0m3t3r0

  • At least 3 words, please.
  • 4696
  • It's SCIENCE!
Re: Can anyone answer this question.
« Reply #389 on: October 19, 2013, 07:31:03 PM »



space-time is a theory? It is simply a 4 dimensional representation of 2 things. The 3 dimensions of space plus the dimension of time. This is hardly a disputable concept.



The key word here being concept.
I hate to sound like an FE'er, but use your head, man.

Oh you definitely sound like one right now. Let me ask you. Do you believe in space and that that space consists of three dimensions?

Now, do you believe that you can describe events using a 4th dimension of time?

Do you think that if I talk to you about an event in history at a particular time I would use the time when it happened and the location that it happened?

This is not a revolutionary idea. It is location + time.
So location + time + mass = gravity.
That explains a lot.


I don't profess to be correct.
Quote from: sceptimatic
I am correct.