Denpressure fails again.

Quote from: sceptimatic on April 09, 2014, 10:37:36 AM

Quote from: inquisitive on April 09, 2014, 10:35:59 AM

Quote from: sceptimatic on April 09, 2014, 10:31:32 AM

Quote from: inquisitive on April 09, 2014, 10:28:17 AM

This means an object weighing 1000g today could be 950g next week.

Yes, as long as you didn't touch the scales.

Have you proved this?

Yes.

This means that objects change weight depending on the weather. This is not true, you are playing games here.

The only way to find out is to try it for yourself. What are you scared of?
You are all seasoned scientist..experts in all fields...I'm sure most of you will have a chamber or access to one. Go and do the experiments. Make as many up to go along with it and see for yourself.
I have many more to do and I'll let you know about those at a later date. In the mean time, go and do the one I set out, it's simple enough and requires only visual proof from your own eyes.
If you come back with "oh what numbers would this nd that be." Then you are scared to try or you simply are full of hot air and do not have any access to any chamber and are simply here arguing from google.
If you are genuine then go and do the experiment without waffling on.

Quote from: sceptimatic on April 10, 2014, 02:58:51 AM

Quote from: Starman on April 09, 2014, 12:32:35 PM

You are lying again. If the test was done in a vacuum chamber show us a picture of it. You make claims now show it.

I'll tell you what! You put yourself down as some scientist know it all and you said you were well off, so I'm assuming that you will have an evacuation chamber or easily be able to get access to one.
So instead of calling me a liar, how about you go and do the experiment that I've just explained. You will see for yourself as long as you do it correctly. My guess is you will either not perform it or you will pretend you have and tell me I'm a liar anyway.
I ask any flat Earth believer to try the experiment I've set out and any logical person who's wish is to find the truth, to do so, because some of these globulites are far from honest.

Surely you just need to see the weight of an object change depending on thr atmospheric pressure.

Not at the top of your stairs you won't. Just do the experiment, what are you scacred of?

Quote from: inquisitive on April 10, 2014, 03:22:55 AM

Quote from: sceptimatic on April 10, 2014, 02:58:51 AM

Quote from: Starman on April 09, 2014, 12:32:35 PM

You are lying again. If the test was done in a vacuum chamber show us a picture of it. You make claims now show it.

I'll tell you what! You put yourself down as some scientist know it all and you said you were well off, so I'm assuming that you will have an evacuation chamber or easily be able to get access to one.
So instead of calling me a liar, how about you go and do the experiment that I've just explained. You will see for yourself as long as you do it correctly. My guess is you will either not perform it or you will pretend you have and tell me I'm a liar anyway.
I ask any flat Earth believer to try the experiment I've set out and any logical person who's wish is to find the truth, to do so, because some of these globulites are far from honest.

Surely you just need to see the weight of an object change depending on thr atmospheric pressure.

Not at the top of your stairs you won't. Just do the experiment, what are you scacred of?

A 5% change in atmospheric pressure should see a weight change, but does not.

Quote from: sceptimatic on April 10, 2014, 02:54:51 AM

There is always trapped air in water inside various elements.

So a block of iron or aluminium, that has a rigid crystalline structure between their atoms, has water and air trapped in it? There is space between the atoms (there is space between all atoms), but not enough for other molecules to penetrate when in a solid state.

Don't be sidestepped by thinking dense objects cannot hold any trapped elements. If they didn't, they would be all the same.
It's the fact that they are all separated into their elemental states that gives them the properties that we see, all dependent on how far down they originate from under more or less pressure plus temperature which determines how much trapped elements remain.
It's why lead and gold, etc will take thousands of years to decay and wood and other things can vary from hundreds to a few years in their normal states to decay.
Your atmospheric pressure is always breaking things down and squeezing everything. It's about which things can resist being put back into the ground the most.
We manage 70 to 100 years roughly, where some stop growing and end up over 6 feet tall and die aged 100 at 4 feet 3 inches. 

Quote from: sceptimatic on April 10, 2014, 03:38:16 AM

Quote from: inquisitive on April 10, 2014, 03:22:55 AM

Quote from: sceptimatic on April 10, 2014, 02:58:51 AM

Quote from: Starman on April 09, 2014, 12:32:35 PM

You are lying again. If the test was done in a vacuum chamber show us a picture of it. You make claims now show it.

I'll tell you what! You put yourself down as some scientist know it all and you said you were well off, so I'm assuming that you will have an evacuation chamber or easily be able to get access to one.
So instead of calling me a liar, how about you go and do the experiment that I've just explained. You will see for yourself as long as you do it correctly. My guess is you will either not perform it or you will pretend you have and tell me I'm a liar anyway.
I ask any flat Earth believer to try the experiment I've set out and any logical person who's wish is to find the truth, to do so, because some of these globulites are far from honest.

Surely you just need to see the weight of an object change depending on thr atmospheric pressure.

Not at the top of your stairs you won't. Just do the experiment, what are you scacred of?

A 5% change in atmospheric pressure should see a weight change, but does not.

Stop telling blatant lies.

Quote from: Starman on April 09, 2014, 12:32:35 PM

You are lying again. If the test was done in a vacuum chamber show us a picture of it. You make claims now show it.

I'll tell you what! You put yourself down as some scientist know it all and you said you were well off, so I'm assuming that you will have an evacuation chamber or easily be able to get access to one.
So instead of calling me a liar, how about you go and do the experiment that I've just explained. You will see for yourself as long as you do it correctly. My guess is you will either not perform it or you will pretend you have and tell me I'm a liar anyway.
I ask any flat Earth believer to try the experiment I've set out and any logical person who's wish is to find the truth, to do so, because some of these globulites are far from honest.

Why should we do an experiment you did not do. Show is pictures of your vacuum chamber.

So many words, so little sense.

Quote from: sceptimatic on April 10, 2014, 02:58:51 AM

Quote from: Starman on April 09, 2014, 12:32:35 PM

You are lying again. If the test was done in a vacuum chamber show us a picture of it. You make claims now show it.

I'll tell you what! You put yourself down as some scientist know it all and you said you were well off, so I'm assuming that you will have an evacuation chamber or easily be able to get access to one.
So instead of calling me a liar, how about you go and do the experiment that I've just explained. You will see for yourself as long as you do it correctly. My guess is you will either not perform it or you will pretend you have and tell me I'm a liar anyway.
I ask any flat Earth believer to try the experiment I've set out and any logical person who's wish is to find the truth, to do so, because some of these globulites are far from honest.

Why should we do an experiment you did not do. Show is pictures of your vacuum chamber.

I don't give a rats anus whether you do an experiment or not. That's entirely up to you and anyone else.
The opportunity is there for you to do this simple test, yet you would rather act like a kid going, "nah nah, I won't do it until you show me yours."
Stop believing you are special and think you can call the shots. You call nothing with me. You either do something or don't. Your choice.

So many words, so little sense.

So few words with no merit.

Quote from: Scintific Method on April 09, 2014, 08:22:51 PM

Quote from: Jorhan Brimve Stahl on April 09, 2014, 12:36:57 PM

Quote from: Starman on April 09, 2014, 12:32:35 PM

Quote from: sceptimatic on April 09, 2014, 10:49:23 AM

I saw a 11g difference in the chamber I used on a 20g piece of wood. It weighed 9g.
Try it out for yourself.

You are lying again. If the test was done in a vacuum chamber show us a picture of it. You make claims now show it.

Fair point actually. By the FES' almost-fanatically-followed ground rule; "pics or it didn't happen"

I'm not overly worried about pictures (although, they would be appreciated); what I'd really like to see is the details on how this test was carried out. The full experimental method, if you will, which would allow others to repeat the test and verify the results independently.

The test is simply explained. You can see this, so I suggest that you simply try it out. What have you got to lose?
I'm sure you have a chamber or can get one. Try it out and you don't have to simply rely on me telling you.

I was more looking for a detailed description of exactly what you did, so that it could be repeated exactly. What you've given so far is a bit too vague for that purpose.

Quote from: RandomREalist on April 09, 2014, 04:56:02 PM

Click for full size

Once the person leaves the wing he/she is no longer under any of their own energy that can effect any lift unless they were wearing wings to create some extra resistance, yet they would still come down. You need to have a real good think on what's been said.

What I diagrammed is what you said. They return to where they came from, they equaled out the pressure that pushed them up, they are now floating, unless another FORCE pulls them down.

Quote from: airyfairy76 on April 10, 2014, 03:26:02 AM

Quote from: sceptimatic on April 10, 2014, 02:54:51 AM

There is always trapped air in water inside various elements.

So a block of iron or aluminium, that has a rigid crystalline structure between their atoms, has water and air trapped in it? There is space between the atoms (there is space between all atoms), but not enough for other molecules to penetrate when in a solid state.

Don't be sidestepped by thinking dense objects cannot hold any trapped elements. If they didn't, they would be all the same.
It's the fact that they are all separated into their elemental states that gives them the properties that we see, all dependent on how far down they originate from under more or less pressure plus temperature which determines how much trapped elements remain.
It's why lead and gold, etc will take thousands of years to decay and wood and other things can vary from hundreds to a few years in their normal states to decay.
Your atmospheric pressure is always breaking things down and squeezing everything. It's about which things can resist being put back into the ground the most.
We manage 70 to 100 years roughly, where some stop growing and end up over 6 feet tall and die aged 100 at 4 feet 3 inches. 

All be the same what? 

Lead and gold are elements - the structure doesn't "trap" anything in its pure state.  Nor does it decay. Some may react with water on their external surfaces to produce rust or other types of corrosion, but they don't decay.

You cannot compare them with wood or any other living tissue, or indeed any other complex material, which is made up of hundreds of different compounds, including water.  They are not comparable in the slightest.

Quote from: sceptimatic on April 10, 2014, 03:32:55 AM

Quote from: Scintific Method on April 09, 2014, 08:22:51 PM

Quote from: Jorhan Brimve Stahl on April 09, 2014, 12:36:57 PM

Quote from: Starman on April 09, 2014, 12:32:35 PM

Quote from: sceptimatic on April 09, 2014, 10:49:23 AM

I saw a 11g difference in the chamber I used on a 20g piece of wood. It weighed 9g.
Try it out for yourself.

You are lying again. If the test was done in a vacuum chamber show us a picture of it. You make claims now show it.

Fair point actually. By the FES' almost-fanatically-followed ground rule; "pics or it didn't happen"

I'm not overly worried about pictures (although, they would be appreciated); what I'd really like to see is the details on how this test was carried out. The full experimental method, if you will, which would allow others to repeat the test and verify the results independently.

The test is simply explained. You can see this, so I suggest that you simply try it out. What have you got to lose?
I'm sure you have a chamber or can get one. Try it out and you don't have to simply rely on me telling you.

I was more looking for a detailed description of exactly what you did, so that it could be repeated exactly. What you've given so far is a bit too vague for that purpose.

Too vague my aris. It couldn't be any simpler. All you're after is a load of silly numbers, because that's what your science demands. I'm not here to baffle the ordinary Joe's head, I'm here to give it straight and simple.
It's there for you to try. Are you scared to try?

Quote from: sceptimatic on April 10, 2014, 03:08:40 AM

Quote from: RandomREalist on April 09, 2014, 04:56:02 PM

Click for full size

Once the person leaves the wing he/she is no longer under any of their own energy that can effect any lift unless they were wearing wings to create some extra resistance, yet they would still come down. You need to have a real good think on what's been said.

What I diagrammed is what you said. They return to where they came from, they equaled out the pressure that pushed them up, they are now floating, unless another FORCE pulls them down.

What you digrammed is nothing like what I said. It's what you think I've said, which isn't the case.

All be the same what? 

Lead and gold are elements - the structure doesn't "trap" anything in its pure state.  Nor does it decay. Some may react with water on their external surfaces to produce rust or other types of corrosion, but they don't decay.

You cannot compare them with wood or any other living tissue, or indeed any other complex material, which is made up of hundreds of different compounds, including water.  They are not comparable in the slightest.

Everything is comparable, it's just a mix of elementsthat change it all to out perceivement. Everything decays, as we know decay to be, which is basically just a break down into elements to eventually take their places back  into the element sandwich and be regurgitated into different forms depending on where they are ejected from and what they have trapped in them.
Nothing on the surface is absolutely pure. It's just as pure as we can get it. Just like we can't make a vacuum.

Quote from: inquisitive on April 10, 2014, 03:39:56 AM

Quote from: sceptimatic on April 10, 2014, 03:38:16 AM

Quote from: inquisitive on April 10, 2014, 03:22:55 AM

Quote from: sceptimatic on April 10, 2014, 02:58:51 AM

Quote from: Starman on April 09, 2014, 12:32:35 PM

You are lying again. If the test was done in a vacuum chamber show us a picture of it. You make claims now show it.

I'll tell you what! You put yourself down as some scientist know it all and you said you were well off, so I'm assuming that you will have an evacuation chamber or easily be able to get access to one.
So instead of calling me a liar, how about you go and do the experiment that I've just explained. You will see for yourself as long as you do it correctly. My guess is you will either not perform it or you will pretend you have and tell me I'm a liar anyway.
I ask any flat Earth believer to try the experiment I've set out and any logical person who's wish is to find the truth, to do so, because some of these globulites are far from honest.

Surely you just need to see the weight of an object change depending on thr atmospheric pressure.

Not at the top of your stairs you won't. Just do the experiment, what are you scacred of?

A 5% change in atmospheric pressure should see a weight change, but does not.

Stop telling blatant lies.

So we should buy weighed items when the atmospheric pressure is low so we get more.

Quote from: Scintific Method on April 10, 2014, 04:25:37 AM

Quote from: sceptimatic on April 10, 2014, 03:32:55 AM

Quote from: Scintific Method on April 09, 2014, 08:22:51 PM

Quote from: Jorhan Brimve Stahl on April 09, 2014, 12:36:57 PM

Quote from: Starman on April 09, 2014, 12:32:35 PM

Quote from: sceptimatic on April 09, 2014, 10:49:23 AM

I saw a 11g difference in the chamber I used on a 20g piece of wood. It weighed 9g.
Try it out for yourself.

You are lying again. If the test was done in a vacuum chamber show us a picture of it. You make claims now show it.

Fair point actually. By the FES' almost-fanatically-followed ground rule; "pics or it didn't happen"

I'm not overly worried about pictures (although, they would be appreciated); what I'd really like to see is the details on how this test was carried out. The full experimental method, if you will, which would allow others to repeat the test and verify the results independently.

The test is simply explained. You can see this, so I suggest that you simply try it out. What have you got to lose?
I'm sure you have a chamber or can get one. Try it out and you don't have to simply rely on me telling you.

I was more looking for a detailed description of exactly what you did, so that it could be repeated exactly. What you've given so far is a bit too vague for that purpose.

Too vague my aris. It couldn't be any simpler. All you're after is a load of silly numbers, because that's what your science demands. I'm not here to baffle the ordinary Joe's head, I'm here to give it straight and simple.
It's there for you to try. Are you scared to try?

No, no numbers, just step-by-step detailed description of exactly what you did, eg "placed block on scale; noted weight; evacuated chamber; noted weight", that kind of thing.

Quote from: sceptimatic on April 10, 2014, 03:47:50 AM

Quote from: inquisitive on April 10, 2014, 03:39:56 AM

Quote from: sceptimatic on April 10, 2014, 03:38:16 AM

Quote from: inquisitive on April 10, 2014, 03:22:55 AM

Quote from: sceptimatic on April 10, 2014, 02:58:51 AM

Quote from: Starman on April 09, 2014, 12:32:35 PM

You are lying again. If the test was done in a vacuum chamber show us a picture of it. You make claims now show it.

I'll tell you what! You put yourself down as some scientist know it all and you said you were well off, so I'm assuming that you will have an evacuation chamber or easily be able to get access to one.
So instead of calling me a liar, how about you go and do the experiment that I've just explained. You will see for yourself as long as you do it correctly. My guess is you will either not perform it or you will pretend you have and tell me I'm a liar anyway.
I ask any flat Earth believer to try the experiment I've set out and any logical person who's wish is to find the truth, to do so, because some of these globulites are far from honest.

Surely you just need to see the weight of an object change depending on thr atmospheric pressure.

Not at the top of your stairs you won't. Just do the experiment, what are you scacred of?

A 5% change in atmospheric pressure should see a weight change, but does not.

Stop telling blatant lies.

So we should buy weighed items when the atmospheric pressure is low so we get more.

It's totally lost on you. You can't even think for yourself when it's all been laid out for you.

Quote from: sceptimatic on April 10, 2014, 04:58:47 AM

Quote from: Scintific Method on April 10, 2014, 04:25:37 AM

Quote from: sceptimatic on April 10, 2014, 03:32:55 AM

Quote from: Scintific Method on April 09, 2014, 08:22:51 PM

Quote from: Jorhan Brimve Stahl on April 09, 2014, 12:36:57 PM

Quote from: Starman on April 09, 2014, 12:32:35 PM

Quote from: sceptimatic on April 09, 2014, 10:49:23 AM

I saw a 11g difference in the chamber I used on a 20g piece of wood. It weighed 9g.
Try it out for yourself.

You are lying again. If the test was done in a vacuum chamber show us a picture of it. You make claims now show it.

Fair point actually. By the FES' almost-fanatically-followed ground rule; "pics or it didn't happen"

I'm not overly worried about pictures (although, they would be appreciated); what I'd really like to see is the details on how this test was carried out. The full experimental method, if you will, which would allow others to repeat the test and verify the results independently.

The test is simply explained. You can see this, so I suggest that you simply try it out. What have you got to lose?
I'm sure you have a chamber or can get one. Try it out and you don't have to simply rely on me telling you.

I was more looking for a detailed description of exactly what you did, so that it could be repeated exactly. What you've given so far is a bit too vague for that purpose.

Too vague my aris. It couldn't be any simpler. All you're after is a load of silly numbers, because that's what your science demands. I'm not here to baffle the ordinary Joe's head, I'm here to give it straight and simple.
It's there for you to try. Are you scared to try?

No, no numbers, just step-by-step detailed description of exactly what you did, eg "placed block on scale; noted weight; evacuated chamber; noted weight", that kind of thing.

I put scales on a table set at 1 kg to ensure I gave myself a nagative reading. I placed a piece of wood onto the scales and the weight read 1020g or one kilogram plus 20 grams, meaning the wood weighed 20 grams.
I then placed them inside an evacuation chamber still reading the same, until I started to evacuate the chamber.
I then got a reading of 1009g or 1 kilogram and 9 grams, meaning I'd lost 11 grams from the 20 gram original weight.
With better or worse pumps you will get different results but always less. Try it out, you're scientific aren't you? You must have a chamber, have you?
Don't take my word for it, try it out.

What kind of scales where they?

What kind of scales where they?

Just a small set of kitchen scales. Any will do as long as they fit into your chamber.

Quote from: sceptimatic on April 10, 2014, 04:58:47 AM

Quote from: Scintific Method on April 10, 2014, 04:25:37 AM

Quote from: sceptimatic on April 10, 2014, 03:32:55 AM

Quote from: Scintific Method on April 09, 2014, 08:22:51 PM

Quote from: Jorhan Brimve Stahl on April 09, 2014, 12:36:57 PM

Quote from: Starman on April 09, 2014, 12:32:35 PM

Quote from: sceptimatic on April 09, 2014, 10:49:23 AM

I saw a 11g difference in the chamber I used on a 20g piece of wood. It weighed 9g.
Try it out for yourself.

You are lying again. If the test was done in a vacuum chamber show us a picture of it. You make claims now show it.

Fair point actually. By the FES' almost-fanatically-followed ground rule; "pics or it didn't happen"

I'm not overly worried about pictures (although, they would be appreciated); what I'd really like to see is the details on how this test was carried out. The full experimental method, if you will, which would allow others to repeat the test and verify the results independently.

The test is simply explained. You can see this, so I suggest that you simply try it out. What have you got to lose?
I'm sure you have a chamber or can get one. Try it out and you don't have to simply rely on me telling you.

I was more looking for a detailed description of exactly what you did, so that it could be repeated exactly. What you've given so far is a bit too vague for that purpose.

Too vague my aris. It couldn't be any simpler. All you're after is a load of silly numbers, because that's what your science demands. I'm not here to baffle the ordinary Joe's head, I'm here to give it straight and simple.
It's there for you to try. Are you scared to try?

No, no numbers, just step-by-step detailed description of exactly what you did, eg "placed block on scale; noted weight; evacuated chamber; noted weight", that kind of thing.

Step 1: Cut a hole in a box.
Step 2: Put your junk in that box.
Step 3: Make her open the box.
And that's the way you do it. 

Try it.  You have a box, don't you?  You have junk, right?  It's all laid out for you. 

Quote from: Scintific Method on April 10, 2014, 05:18:51 AM

Quote from: sceptimatic on April 10, 2014, 04:58:47 AM

Quote from: Scintific Method on April 10, 2014, 04:25:37 AM

Quote from: sceptimatic on April 10, 2014, 03:32:55 AM

Quote from: Scintific Method on April 09, 2014, 08:22:51 PM

Quote from: Jorhan Brimve Stahl on April 09, 2014, 12:36:57 PM

Quote from: Starman on April 09, 2014, 12:32:35 PM

Quote from: sceptimatic on April 09, 2014, 10:49:23 AM

I saw a 11g difference in the chamber I used on a 20g piece of wood. It weighed 9g.
Try it out for yourself.

You are lying again. If the test was done in a vacuum chamber show us a picture of it. You make claims now show it.

Fair point actually. By the FES' almost-fanatically-followed ground rule; "pics or it didn't happen"

I'm not overly worried about pictures (although, they would be appreciated); what I'd really like to see is the details on how this test was carried out. The full experimental method, if you will, which would allow others to repeat the test and verify the results independently.

The test is simply explained. You can see this, so I suggest that you simply try it out. What have you got to lose?
I'm sure you have a chamber or can get one. Try it out and you don't have to simply rely on me telling you.

I was more looking for a detailed description of exactly what you did, so that it could be repeated exactly. What you've given so far is a bit too vague for that purpose.

Too vague my aris. It couldn't be any simpler. All you're after is a load of silly numbers, because that's what your science demands. I'm not here to baffle the ordinary Joe's head, I'm here to give it straight and simple.
It's there for you to try. Are you scared to try?

No, no numbers, just step-by-step detailed description of exactly what you did, eg "placed block on scale; noted weight; evacuated chamber; noted weight", that kind of thing.

Step 1: Cut a hole in a box.
Step 2: Put your junk in that box.
Step 3: Make her open the box.
And that's the way you do it. 

Try it.  You have a box, don't you?  You have junk, right?  It's all laid out for you.

Now tell her to step outside of that box and voila, she's a flat Earth believer, because she now has a mind of her own and you are still in a world of your own.

Quote from: inquisitive on April 10, 2014, 05:16:39 AM

Quote from: sceptimatic on April 10, 2014, 03:47:50 AM

Quote from: inquisitive on April 10, 2014, 03:39:56 AM

Quote from: sceptimatic on April 10, 2014, 03:38:16 AM

Quote from: inquisitive on April 10, 2014, 03:22:55 AM

Quote from: sceptimatic on April 10, 2014, 02:58:51 AM

Quote from: Starman on April 09, 2014, 12:32:35 PM

You are lying again. If the test was done in a vacuum chamber show us a picture of it. You make claims now show it.

I'll tell you what! You put yourself down as some scientist know it all and you said you were well off, so I'm assuming that you will have an evacuation chamber or easily be able to get access to one.
So instead of calling me a liar, how about you go and do the experiment that I've just explained. You will see for yourself as long as you do it correctly. My guess is you will either not perform it or you will pretend you have and tell me I'm a liar anyway.
I ask any flat Earth believer to try the experiment I've set out and any logical person who's wish is to find the truth, to do so, because some of these globulites are far from honest.

Surely you just need to see the weight of an object change depending on thr atmospheric pressure.

Not at the top of your stairs you won't. Just do the experiment, what are you scacred of?

A 5% change in atmospheric pressure should see a weight change, but does not.

Stop telling blatant lies.

So we should buy weighed items when the atmospheric pressure is low so we get more.

It's totally lost on you. You can't even think for yourself when it's all been laid out for you.

If the weight in a chamber changes due to pressure then it will also change in the open. Agree?

If the weight in a chamber changes due to pressure then it will also change in the open. Agree?

Potentially yes, if you gain enough altitude. A very tall building, like a skyscraper roof would be sufficient to show some change, I would imagine. It would be far easier to simply use a chamber. Unless you actually have access to a skyscraper roof. If not, I suppose you could walk into one wearing a chef's hat, carrying your scales under your arm, (don't forget the checky trousers) and carrying a small lump of cheese. Just tell them you're making a quiche, upon the roof.

Quote from: inquisitive on April 10, 2014, 08:04:39 AM

If the weight in a chamber changes due to pressure then it will also change in the open. Agree?

Potentially yes, if you gain enough altitude. A very tall building, like a skyscraper roof would be sufficient to show some change, I would imagine. It would be far easier to simply use a chamber. Unless you actually have access to a skyscraper roof. If not, I suppose you could walk into one wearing a chef's hat, carrying your scales under your arm, (don't forget the checky trousers) and carrying a small lump of cheese. Just tell them you're making a quiche, upon the roof.

Atmospheric pressure can vary from eg. 990 to 1050, so that should show a difference.

Quote from: sceptimatic on April 10, 2014, 08:14:16 AM

Quote from: inquisitive on April 10, 2014, 08:04:39 AM

If the weight in a chamber changes due to pressure then it will also change in the open. Agree?

Potentially yes, if you gain enough altitude. A very tall building, like a skyscraper roof would be sufficient to show some change, I would imagine. It would be far easier to simply use a chamber. Unless you actually have access to a skyscraper roof. If not, I suppose you could walk into one wearing a chef's hat, carrying your scales under your arm, (don't forget the checky trousers) and carrying a small lump of cheese. Just tell them you're making a quiche, upon the roof.

Atmospheric pressure can vary from eg. 990 to 1050, so that should show a difference.

Time for you to go and do some experiments then, don't you think?

Quote from: inquisitive on April 10, 2014, 08:18:12 AM

Quote from: sceptimatic on April 10, 2014, 08:14:16 AM

Quote from: inquisitive on April 10, 2014, 08:04:39 AM

If the weight in a chamber changes due to pressure then it will also change in the open. Agree?

Potentially yes, if you gain enough altitude. A very tall building, like a skyscraper roof would be sufficient to show some change, I would imagine. It would be far easier to simply use a chamber. Unless you actually have access to a skyscraper roof. If not, I suppose you could walk into one wearing a chef's hat, carrying your scales under your arm, (don't forget the checky trousers) and carrying a small lump of cheese. Just tell them you're making a quiche, upon the roof.

Atmospheric pressure can vary from eg. 990 to 1050, so that should show a difference.

Time for you to go and do some experiments then, don't you think?

No need, when did you last hear of the weight of sugar changing depending on the weather?

Playing along with the troll, for a moment, Scepti, if all elements attempt to find their place, if I dig a hole, and I find a tuber while digging, and I put it at the bottom of the hole after digging, deeper than where I found it, why does the tuber not rise to the level I found it at? Why does the natural state of all things seem to be at the bottom, regardless of its weight/ density/ whatever?

I also have a small experiment for you to weigh in on (pun unavoidable). I have two spring scales. One hangs vertically, the other horizontally. Attached to both are identical cables whose weight is known. The cable hangs over a simple pulley with no notable resistance, so that the end of the cable hangs down.  In both cases, two object of identical shape and weight are hung from each scale, and show the same weight.

Both weights and scales are inside an evacuation chamber, which is then evacuated. How does this evacuation affect both spring scales, one hanging vertically, one horizontally?

Quote from: sceptimatic on April 10, 2014, 08:27:43 AM

Quote from: inquisitive on April 10, 2014, 08:18:12 AM

Quote from: sceptimatic on April 10, 2014, 08:14:16 AM

Quote from: inquisitive on April 10, 2014, 08:04:39 AM

If the weight in a chamber changes due to pressure then it will also change in the open. Agree?

Potentially yes, if you gain enough altitude. A very tall building, like a skyscraper roof would be sufficient to show some change, I would imagine. It would be far easier to simply use a chamber. Unless you actually have access to a skyscraper roof. If not, I suppose you could walk into one wearing a chef's hat, carrying your scales under your arm, (don't forget the checky trousers) and carrying a small lump of cheese. Just tell them you're making a quiche, upon the roof.

Atmospheric pressure can vary from eg. 990 to 1050, so that should show a difference.

Time for you to go and do some experiments then, don't you think?

No need, when did you last hear of the weight of sugar changing depending on the weather?

When was the last time you heard of a bucket of water change depending on the weather or a nice moist cake, or bread,etc?
Start putting your brain into gear and think for yourself or you'll simply wither way being an air head.