Denpressure is the best explanation for what keeps us on the Earth

Quote from: TheBigOne on November 13, 2015, 11:42:44 AM

You begin with math that bears no relation to what I gave,

I just did the math according to what you said I should do. You don't know what it looks like when you do the math your way?

Quote from: TheBigOne on November 13, 2015, 11:42:44 AM

you don't understand how lifting your foot up does not provide a closed box (),

No, I don't understand how lifting a foot provides a closed box. However, I do know that earth's atmosphere is a closed system (more or less).

Quote from: TheBigOne on November 13, 2015, 11:42:44 AM

and you seem to be somehow ignoring the horizontal direction entirely. As a straw man goes, that's a very impressive one.

Horizontal pressure should equalize. If it doesn't according to your model, then that is another incoherence.

And you are still evading the point that according to your model, pressure should be greater under us than above us, and therefore we should fall up.

I am not evading that point. That point doesn't mean anything given that it is only relevant in a closed box, and as you say, lifting your foot does not provide one. You are comparing completely different situations. Let's see how ridiculous you're being, shall we?

• The rate of change isn't exponential. Upwards force would still be resisted by the downwards, because there is still a force acting to keep us down
• Quantity of air molecules is still relevant
• The only reason there is a large amount of pressure is because air is compressed: if there is no closed box, this cannot happen

You use math that still isn't even close to what I suggested, and you're making an incoherent claim.

I asked you:

Quote

Quote from: Jadyyn on November 11, 2015, 01:30:17 PM

Quote from: TheBigOne on November 11, 2015, 01:17:20 AM

Quote from: Jadyyn on November 10, 2015, 04:18:43 PM

Quote from: TheBigOne on November 10, 2015, 02:38:00 PM

Quote from: Jadyyn on November 10, 2015, 11:11:07 AM

Quote from: TheBigOne on November 10, 2015, 09:41:59 AM

Quote from: JimmyTheCrab on November 10, 2015, 09:07:23 AM

Quote from: TheBigOne on November 10, 2015, 08:39:08 AM

What dome are you talking about? I have never mentioned a dome, much less one of ice.

Your thread is called "Denpressure is the best explanation for what keeps us on the Earth".  Denpressure is scepti's "model" and at it's heart is a giant ice dome.  Without the ice dome you don't have denpressure.  Maybe you should have a cursory look at the model you are championing 

Quote

The gravity formula functions as a means of measuring ripples. You claim these ripples are in space, I take the logical step of saying they are in fluidic space.

This doesn't really mean anything.

So, given you are now not doing Denpressure, what stops the atmosphere from flying off into space?

I learnt of the denpressure theory from a concave Earther, I've had little experience with Sceptimatic.
There is no dome. There is fluidic space, which we can observe, extending to the threshold of the atmosphere, so that the vibrations of the Sun's heat and waves of light reach us. The fluid is what compresses air against the Earth.

So how will this let us find Neptune (mathematically) by watching Uranus' movement? How would it let us find Pluto based on Uranus' and Neptune's movement?

Quote

The existence of an unknown ninth planet was first proposed by Percival Lowell, who theorized that wobbles in the orbits of Uranus and Neptune were caused by the gravitational pull of an unknown planetary body. Lowell calculated the approximate location of the hypothesized ninth planet and searched for more than a decade without success. However, in 1929, using the calculations of Powell and W.H. Pickering as a guide, the search for Pluto was resumed at the Lowell Observatory in Arizona. On February 18, 1930, Tombaugh discovered the tiny, distant planet by use of a new astronomic technique of photographic plates combined with a blink microscope. His finding was confirmed by several other astronomers, and on March 13, 1930–the anniversary of Lowell’s birth and of William Hershel’s discovery of Uranus–the discovery of Pluto was publicly announced.(http://www.history.com/this-day-in-history/pluto-discovered)

We observe wobbles in stars over years and can determine other masses rotating around them. How do we do this with denpressure (air pressure - sceptimatic; or fluidic space - BigOne)?

Motion through fluid, ripples. I explained this.

Yes, ON fluids there are ripples/waves (like stones dropped in a pond). Tides ebb - come and go. These are very similar to sine waves/sinc waves. IN fluids are there ripples/waves (i.e. under water)? I didn't think so because seismic S waves do not travel through liquids. Neptune and Pluto did not move in ripples/waves. They did not pull Uranus and Neptune in ripples/waves. There was a constant pull that behaved according to gravitational formulas based on distance (squared).

You're wrong.

Well that explains denpressure. I will remember this type of answer when other FEers ask me arguments. Thank you.

"You're wrong." How?

Why weren't you threatened with being banned?

What I said was all that needed to be said. You uttered a lie, I pointed this fact out.

Quote from: TheBigOne on November 13, 2015, 11:41:13 AM

Quote from: Kirk Johnson on November 13, 2015, 01:57:47 AM

Can someone please ban Kirk? He insults in every thread. I'd guess he's Jadyyn's alt to blow off steam and insult everyone.

Show proof. I can show proof you are trying to insult me calling me an alt as an effort to avoid my questions. That's low.

I call you an alt because you are, jadyyn. You're online at the same times, you have no purpose except to compliment one another and go after the same people. It's all an ego trip, and I see no point in answering questions which have always been answered, jadyyn. Alts get permabanned, low content posters get banned, you really need a time off. Mods, please?

do u wanna a final disproof of u're theory?

How does u're theory explain zero-g flight?

in case u don't know u get on a plane, it gets in the air, then it's been put on a parabolic maneuvers and u experience the absence of weight.... but here's the catch, the airplane is still pressurized and the air in the cabin is solidal to the reference system f the airplane so u don't have any acceleration between u and what u claim is the source of weight force.

Perfect pressurization is impossible, and the effects of acceleration still exist.

How much extra weight should objects under 4,000 psi gain?

Quote from: TheBigOne on November 13, 2015, 11:44:21 AM

Quote from: luckyfred on November 13, 2015, 03:34:26 AM

all your considerations about the cilinder are based on a wrong assumption... inside a pressure vessel, in normal conditions, there is no flow of molecules from one side to the other, all are confinend in a very small space by the huge number of molecules in their sorroundings. in a simpler way, there's no way for a molecule that bounces off the wall of the cylinder to impact the wall on the opposite side, it 'll impact another air molecule muche sooner and deflect its trajectory, making it impact with another molecule and so on.

just to prove my point here some math.
air density at sealevel and 15°c is 1.225 kg/m^3 so if we consider a volume of 1 cm^3 (a cube of 1cm of side, if u're not used to international system a cm is less tha half an inch)  we have 0.001225 grams of air. the molar mass of air is 28.96u, which means that a mole of air has a mass of 28.96 grams. a cubic centimeter of air in the conditions described above has (0.001225/28.96) 4.23*10^-5 moles, since a mole contains 6.022*10^23 molecules a cubic centimeter of air is formed by
 ((4.23*10^-5)*(6.022*10^23)) 2.5473*10^19 molecules of air, just for comparison a bilion of molecules would be 1*10^9.

so, do u really think that a molecule bouncing off the side of a cylinder has some chance of travelling all the way to the other side without first impacting another molecule?

No, the model provided a mathematically intelligible simplification. This is what modelling is. What a molecule does do, however, is provide a direction of movement which will cause another molecule to hit the far wall, with far more energy the closer that molecule is to the first.

no you cannot neglect the bilions of bilions of bilions of molecules, otherwise u just providing a model that cannot apply to the air at sealevel pressure. u're talking about air we breath and u cannot walk your way around the fact that there's a huge amount of molecules in a thiny space.  about the impact u're over semplifying again, the impact does not means that the impacted molecules we'll depart with the same direction that the impacting molecule had, this is not how it works. since all the molecules have different direction and velocity when the impact eachother their direction and speed is changed accordingly to the angle of impact and the molecules' own kinetical energy and momentum. and considering the numeber of molecules and impact the result is that there's no predetermined direction of flow for the particles which simply move randomly hitting every surface within the pressure vessel with the same number of impact for unit of surface and time, causing an uniform pressure.

briefly u're understanding is foundamentally wrong, fluid inside a cylinder are in static condition on a macroscopic scale, there's no flow from one side to the other.

moreover if you had read the links that i've posted you would have understod that all pressure vessel are desinged considering an uniform pressure inside so if you right about different pressure between the sides and the ends good luck next time u'll go scuba diving or buy a propane tank for your barbecue.

None of that is relevant. Everything has been explained.

How much extra weight should objects under 4,000 psi gain?

Stop evading.

the big one, u're like a little child that goes "bla bla bla bla" when told something he doesn't like. perfect pressurization.... it is possible, aircraft cabin it's mantained at a specific pressure value, compressed air from the engine it's being pumped into the cabin to replace the one escaped from the non perfect seals. but most of all here we're talking about ZERO WEIGHT, are telling me that in your magic non linear model a slight decrease in pressure causes the force to go to zero?

of course acceleration is still present and relevant, if u consider that the source of the acceleration that causes weight is referred to a frame different from the one of the airplane, a frame in which the airplane has an acceleration equal and opposed.

u absolutely don't know anythin about physics.

Quote from: Jadyyn on November 13, 2015, 02:46:37 PM

I asked you:

Quote

Quote from: Jadyyn on November 11, 2015, 01:30:17 PM

Quote from: TheBigOne on November 11, 2015, 01:17:20 AM

Quote from: Jadyyn on November 10, 2015, 04:18:43 PM

Quote from: TheBigOne on November 10, 2015, 02:38:00 PM

Quote from: Jadyyn on November 10, 2015, 11:11:07 AM

Quote from: TheBigOne on November 10, 2015, 09:41:59 AM

Quote from: JimmyTheCrab on November 10, 2015, 09:07:23 AM

Quote from: TheBigOne on November 10, 2015, 08:39:08 AM

What dome are you talking about? I have never mentioned a dome, much less one of ice.

Your thread is called "Denpressure is the best explanation for what keeps us on the Earth".  Denpressure is scepti's "model" and at it's heart is a giant ice dome.  Without the ice dome you don't have denpressure.  Maybe you should have a cursory look at the model you are championing 

Quote

The gravity formula functions as a means of measuring ripples. You claim these ripples are in space, I take the logical step of saying they are in fluidic space.

This doesn't really mean anything.

So, given you are now not doing Denpressure, what stops the atmosphere from flying off into space?

I learnt of the denpressure theory from a concave Earther, I've had little experience with Sceptimatic.
There is no dome. There is fluidic space, which we can observe, extending to the threshold of the atmosphere, so that the vibrations of the Sun's heat and waves of light reach us. The fluid is what compresses air against the Earth.

So how will this let us find Neptune (mathematically) by watching Uranus' movement? How would it let us find Pluto based on Uranus' and Neptune's movement?

Quote

The existence of an unknown ninth planet was first proposed by Percival Lowell, who theorized that wobbles in the orbits of Uranus and Neptune were caused by the gravitational pull of an unknown planetary body. Lowell calculated the approximate location of the hypothesized ninth planet and searched for more than a decade without success. However, in 1929, using the calculations of Powell and W.H. Pickering as a guide, the search for Pluto was resumed at the Lowell Observatory in Arizona. On February 18, 1930, Tombaugh discovered the tiny, distant planet by use of a new astronomic technique of photographic plates combined with a blink microscope. His finding was confirmed by several other astronomers, and on March 13, 1930–the anniversary of Lowell’s birth and of William Hershel’s discovery of Uranus–the discovery of Pluto was publicly announced.(http://www.history.com/this-day-in-history/pluto-discovered)

We observe wobbles in stars over years and can determine other masses rotating around them. How do we do this with denpressure (air pressure - sceptimatic; or fluidic space - BigOne)?

Motion through fluid, ripples. I explained this.

Yes, ON fluids there are ripples/waves (like stones dropped in a pond). Tides ebb - come and go. These are very similar to sine waves/sinc waves. IN fluids are there ripples/waves (i.e. under water)? I didn't think so because seismic S waves do not travel through liquids. Neptune and Pluto did not move in ripples/waves. They did not pull Uranus and Neptune in ripples/waves. There was a constant pull that behaved according to gravitational formulas based on distance (squared).

You're wrong.

Well that explains denpressure. I will remember this type of answer when other FEers ask me arguments. Thank you.

"You're wrong." How?

Why weren't you threatened with being banned?

What I said was all that needed to be said. You uttered a lie, I pointed this fact out.

"What I said was all that needed to be said" about a whole paragraph. Your response is 2 vague words. This is the second time I ask for a reasonable answer. Nothing.

Just like JR. "You uttered a lie" - what lie? Again a unsubstantiated random vague statement (like JRoweSkeptic does all the time). I am waiting for you to start insulting me and calling me names like JR does.

I call you an alt because you are, jadyyn. You're online at the same times, you have no purpose except to compliment one another and go after the same people. It's all an ego trip, and I see no point in answering questions which have always been answered, jadyyn. Alts get permabanned, low content posters get banned, you really need a time off. Mods, please?

More lies. I've been debating here for like 2 months. I have presented arguments and rebuttles. FEers don't like me because I have disproven their models. I go into detail explaining what I believe - not some unsubstantiated random vague statements and insults.

"go after the same people" because JRoa and JRoweSkeptic answer my posts. What would you have me do?

JRoweSkeptic presented a DEF model. Should we not discuss it? Actually, *I* am done discussing it. It is a FANTASY. Until something
falsifiable and testable is presented, I will not waste more time on it.

As far as Kirk is concerned, I don't control him. He can say and do whatever he wants. I have no affiliation with him other than the posts in this forum.

I call you an alt because you are, jadyyn. You're online at the same times, you have no purpose except to compliment one another and go after the same people. It's all an ego trip, and I see no point in answering questions which have always been answered, jadyyn. Alts get permabanned, low content posters get banned, you really need a time off. Mods, please?

This is no proof. Prove that Jadyyn and I are the same person.

After that: Prove that it changes something relevant to the topic.

The mods can check our IPs and online times. They can verify how stupid you are making these claims.

Quote from: luckyfred on November 13, 2015, 12:54:10 PM

do u wanna a final disproof of u're theory?

How does u're theory explain zero-g flight?

in case u don't know u get on a plane, it gets in the air, then it's been put on a parabolic maneuvers and u experience the absence of weight.... but here's the catch, the airplane is still pressurized and the air in the cabin is solidal to the reference system f the airplane so u don't have any acceleration between u and what u claim is the source of weight force.

Perfect pressurization is impossible, and the effects of acceleration still exist.

Clearly an evasion. Denpressure cannot provide any evidence for the existence of zero G flight.

Quote from: sokarul on November 13, 2015, 03:11:41 PM

How much extra weight should objects under 4,000 psi gain?

Stop evading.

He made a clear question, and you didn't answer. I believe you were talking to yourself, then? 

Quote from: sokarul on November 13, 2015, 03:11:41 PM

How much extra weight should objects under 4,000 psi gain?

Stop evading.

Evading what? It's a  simple question.

Quote from: Kirk Johnson on November 13, 2015, 12:45:13 PM

Quote from: TheBigOne on November 13, 2015, 11:41:13 AM

Quote from: Kirk Johnson on November 13, 2015, 01:57:47 AM

Can someone please ban Kirk? He insults in every thread. I'd guess he's Jadyyn's alt to blow off steam and insult everyone.

Show proof. I can show proof you are trying to insult me calling me an alt as an effort to avoid my questions. That's low.

I call you an alt because you are, jadyyn. You're online at the same times, you have no purpose except to compliment one another and go after the same people. It's all an ego trip, and I see no point in answering questions which have always been answered, jadyyn. Alts get permabanned, low content posters get banned, you really need a time off. Mods, please?

Hey, using your argument, I can prove that jroa and JRoweSkeptic are alts! Check out the "Another example of why the flat earth theory is wrong" thread - Reply #53-#55. They are online at the same times. They have no purpose except to play games with each other. They go after the same people - me. Alts get permabanned. As JRoweSkeptic often just gives one word answers like "circular", does this qualify for "low content posters get banned"?  Mods, please? Am I doing your argument style wrong?

Quote from: TheBigOne on November 13, 2015, 03:14:28 PM

Quote from: sokarul on November 13, 2015, 03:11:41 PM

How much extra weight should objects under 4,000 psi gain?

Stop evading.

Evading what? It's a  simple question.

Thebigone's the one evading. That's why he say that others are "evading": He's evading by saying other are evading.

Madness.

I told you why this was not true. The pressure is caused by the collisions with air molecules. There will be more of these at closer walls.

Scepti didn't really give an answer, so I'll ask you (I haven't seen it mentioned elsewhere), would the pressure difference between the side and ends of the tank have a measurable difference if one were to install gauges at these two locations?

Quote from: 29silhouette on November 09, 2015, 08:36:31 AM

Denpressure doesn't work.

Denpressure  works perfectly and perfectly fits what we see and feel.

We see and feel none of what one should expect to see and feel if denpressure worked the way you have described.

Quote from: 29silhouette on November 09, 2015, 08:36:31 AM

Air pressure pushes nearly equally on all sides of an object, yet only moves it one direction?

What do you mean by moves in one direction?

Exactly what I mean, "one direction".  That's why I chose the words.  Things fall 'down', not sideways or up.

Quote from: 29silhouette on November 09, 2015, 08:36:31 AM

  Sceptimatic claims 'stacked air' above the object or pressure buildup from being lifted, yet it only works in one direction?

Explain what you're talking about.

Do things fall because of or 'stacked' air molecules or not?

Quote from: 29silhouette on November 09, 2015, 08:36:31 AM

Sceptimatic claims it's the air molecules above other air molecules that push downward, but what causes the topmost air molecule to push downward?

No I didn't. I said it's all a push on push or push against resistance top push, both ways.
The top most molecules make up the ice dome. They are fully expanded and are dormant, so they freeze because they do no pushing until they encounter more pressure pushing against them. This creates what we would know as a superfluid, created under and pushing UP into that ice.
Call it natures window cleaner against the real vacuum of true blackness that is not space that we know of.

Are you saying things can fall upwards too?

Quote from: 29silhouette on November 09, 2015, 08:36:31 AM

  This means there is nothing pushing down on the one below it, and so that one won't push on the one below it either, so on and so on all the way to the ground.

As I explained above. The push is from the bottom to the top due to agitation due to compression release.

Explain what you are talking about.

Quote from: 29silhouette on November 09, 2015, 08:36:31 AM

A block of lead is heavier than an equally sized block of aluminum.  Sceptimatic claims the aluminum is lighter because the air pressure passes through it more easily than the lead.

Air pressure is part of it. It's like a dense sponge against a porous sponge. The dense one weighs heavier on a man made scale because it displaces more atmospheric pressure acting upon it than a porous one which displaces much less and so can't repel the atmospheric pressure as much.

To make it thought simple, Imagine hitting a tennis ball with a new raquet. You find you repel that ball easily but that ball puts pressure on that raquet strings because those strings are small enough to repel the ball.
Now use a raquet with many strings that are snapped, with gaps nearly the size of the ball. The result is a trapped ball when hit or the ball squeezes through, meaning you struggle to repel the ball and you don't feel that pressure as much.
Take some time to think about what I'm saying.

Lead is like a dense sponge and aluminum not so much?  Is that correct?

Quote from: 29silhouette on November 09, 2015, 08:36:31 AM

Simply measuring how fast air pressure returns to a container with a cap made of aluminum vs one made of lead will either prove or disprove this quite easily.

This is no good. You're not really getting the point.

Are you saying air/air pressure passes through aluminum easier than lead?  Yes or no.

Quote from: 29silhouette on November 09, 2015, 08:36:31 AM

If a cylinder has higher pressure inside at the ends vs the sides (as thebigone claims) then inserting a gauge at these two locations and taking measurements would be rather easy.

Tell me something. If you compress a spring into a tube. Let's use a truck suspension spring under full load. Where is the major strength from that spring coming from if you were to take the loads off it and allow it to decompress?

Take some time to think about this and you might learn something and maybe stop hanging onto something  (gravity) that you clearly know is bullshit but are scared to admit.

Why are you trying to compare a spring, which applies pressure at the ends, to air pressure, which applies pressure in all directions?

Man, pressure has no effect on gravity - or downward acceleration, for gravity deniers. Everybody knows that, and this can be tested. A vaccum chamber can easily reduce pressure to a mere 0,01% of atmospheric pressure with no change to the weight measured of what's inside.

Thebigone's just insane. And we find some joy debating him and seeing him evade so easy questions that utterly disprove his gibberish.

He's even asking to ban some people (me included) so he don't have to see our questions anymore.

I am not evading that point. That point doesn't mean anything given that it is only relevant in a closed box, and as you say, lifting your foot does not provide one. You are comparing completely different situations. Let's see how ridiculous you're being, shall we?

So the laws of physics works differently in a closed box compared to not in a closed box? So air is sentient and knows when it is in a closed box and how to behave when it is in one? Sorry, but just no. You can't evade this one. You specifically claimed that shorter distances have greater pressure. Above you is also NOT a closed box. It is actually LESS closed above you than below you. No matter how you look at it, according to your model we would fall up.

• The rate of change isn't exponential. Upwards force would still be resisted by the downwards, because there is still a force acting to keep us down
• Quantity of air molecules is still relevant
• The only reason there is a large amount of pressure is because air is compressed: if there is no closed box, this cannot happen

1. You claimed that it was not linear. Now you claim it is not exponential. So is it a polynomial funktion then? But wouldn't that mean that difference in pressure would increase more drastically the greater the ration between two distances are? So when we are on the ground we'd experience an extreme difference in pressure and be blown up? Your model just seems to get worse.

2. Not so much apparently according to you in your closed box example. And I will assume that air is not sentient.

3. So SOMETHING has to be compressing the air in our atmosphere (Because we know it is compressed). It can't be pressure alone, because pressure would just cause all air to be blown into space. So it is either a dome, UA or gravity then.

You use math that still isn't even close to what I suggested, and you're making an incoherent claim.

It is very close to what you suggested. Spot on, in fact. Making false claims does not make you credible.

the big one, u're like a little child that goes "bla bla bla bla" when told something he doesn't like. perfect pressurization.... it is possible, aircraft cabin it's mantained at a specific pressure value, compressed air from the engine it's being pumped into the cabin to replace the one escaped from the non perfect seals. but most of all here we're talking about ZERO WEIGHT, are telling me that in your magic non linear model a slight decrease in pressure causes the force to go to zero?

of course acceleration is still present and relevant, if u consider that the source of the acceleration that causes weight is referred to a frame different from the one of the airplane, a frame in which the airplane has an acceleration equal and opposed.

u absolutely don't know anythin about physics.

I have no idea what you're trying to say. There is no pressure acting on you if the downwards force of the air is cancelled by an upwards acceleration. The air will functionally be stationary, and provide only friction.

Quote from: TheBigOne on November 13, 2015, 03:08:43 PM

Quote from: Jadyyn on November 13, 2015, 02:46:37 PM

I asked you:

Quote

Quote from: Jadyyn on November 11, 2015, 01:30:17 PM

Quote from: TheBigOne on November 11, 2015, 01:17:20 AM

Quote from: Jadyyn on November 10, 2015, 04:18:43 PM

Quote from: TheBigOne on November 10, 2015, 02:38:00 PM

Quote from: Jadyyn on November 10, 2015, 11:11:07 AM

Quote from: TheBigOne on November 10, 2015, 09:41:59 AM

Quote from: JimmyTheCrab on November 10, 2015, 09:07:23 AM

Quote from: TheBigOne on November 10, 2015, 08:39:08 AM

What dome are you talking about? I have never mentioned a dome, much less one of ice.

Your thread is called "Denpressure is the best explanation for what keeps us on the Earth".  Denpressure is scepti's "model" and at it's heart is a giant ice dome.  Without the ice dome you don't have denpressure.  Maybe you should have a cursory look at the model you are championing 

Quote

The gravity formula functions as a means of measuring ripples. You claim these ripples are in space, I take the logical step of saying they are in fluidic space.

This doesn't really mean anything.

So, given you are now not doing Denpressure, what stops the atmosphere from flying off into space?

I learnt of the denpressure theory from a concave Earther, I've had little experience with Sceptimatic.
There is no dome. There is fluidic space, which we can observe, extending to the threshold of the atmosphere, so that the vibrations of the Sun's heat and waves of light reach us. The fluid is what compresses air against the Earth.

So how will this let us find Neptune (mathematically) by watching Uranus' movement? How would it let us find Pluto based on Uranus' and Neptune's movement?

Quote

The existence of an unknown ninth planet was first proposed by Percival Lowell, who theorized that wobbles in the orbits of Uranus and Neptune were caused by the gravitational pull of an unknown planetary body. Lowell calculated the approximate location of the hypothesized ninth planet and searched for more than a decade without success. However, in 1929, using the calculations of Powell and W.H. Pickering as a guide, the search for Pluto was resumed at the Lowell Observatory in Arizona. On February 18, 1930, Tombaugh discovered the tiny, distant planet by use of a new astronomic technique of photographic plates combined with a blink microscope. His finding was confirmed by several other astronomers, and on March 13, 1930–the anniversary of Lowell’s birth and of William Hershel’s discovery of Uranus–the discovery of Pluto was publicly announced.(http://www.history.com/this-day-in-history/pluto-discovered)

We observe wobbles in stars over years and can determine other masses rotating around them. How do we do this with denpressure (air pressure - sceptimatic; or fluidic space - BigOne)?

Motion through fluid, ripples. I explained this.

Yes, ON fluids there are ripples/waves (like stones dropped in a pond). Tides ebb - come and go. These are very similar to sine waves/sinc waves. IN fluids are there ripples/waves (i.e. under water)? I didn't think so because seismic S waves do not travel through liquids. Neptune and Pluto did not move in ripples/waves. They did not pull Uranus and Neptune in ripples/waves. There was a constant pull that behaved according to gravitational formulas based on distance (squared).

You're wrong.

Well that explains denpressure. I will remember this type of answer when other FEers ask me arguments. Thank you.

"You're wrong." How?

Why weren't you threatened with being banned?

What I said was all that needed to be said. You uttered a lie, I pointed this fact out.

"What I said was all that needed to be said" about a whole paragraph. Your response is 2 vague words. This is the second time I ask for a reasonable answer. Nothing.

Just like JR. "You uttered a lie" - what lie? Again a unsubstantiated random vague statement (like JRoweSkeptic does all the time). I am waiting for you to start insulting me and calling me names like JR does.

Quote

I call you an alt because you are, jadyyn. You're online at the same times, you have no purpose except to compliment one another and go after the same people. It's all an ego trip, and I see no point in answering questions which have always been answered, jadyyn. Alts get permabanned, low content posters get banned, you really need a time off. Mods, please?

More lies. I've been debating here for like 2 months. I have presented arguments and rebuttles. FEers don't like me because I have disproven their models. I go into detail explaining what I believe - not some unsubstantiated random vague statements and insults.

"go after the same people" because JRoa and JRoweSkeptic answer my posts. What would you have me do?

JRoweSkeptic presented a DEF model. Should we not discuss it? Actually, *I* am done discussing it. It is a FANTASY. Until something
falsifiable and testable is presented, I will not waste more time on it.

As far as Kirk is concerned, I don't control him. He can say and do whatever he wants. I have no affiliation with him other than the posts in this forum.

If you lie, it doesn't matter how much you lie for, I'm not going to spend my time addressing it. Take your alts and get out.

Quote from: TheBigOne on November 13, 2015, 03:09:48 PM

I call you an alt because you are, jadyyn. You're online at the same times, you have no purpose except to compliment one another and go after the same people. It's all an ego trip, and I see no point in answering questions which have always been answered, jadyyn. Alts get permabanned, low content posters get banned, you really need a time off. Mods, please?

This is no proof. Prove that Jadyyn and I are the same person.

After that: Prove that it changes something relevant to the topic.

The mods can check our IPs and online times. They can verify how stupid you are making these claims.

Proxies exist, and your defensiveness, and how often you're buttbuddies is proof enough.

Quote from: TheBigOne on November 13, 2015, 03:14:28 PM

Quote from: sokarul on November 13, 2015, 03:11:41 PM

How much extra weight should objects under 4,000 psi gain?

Stop evading.

Evading what? It's a  simple question.

What color is sound?

That's also a clear, simple question. What's your point? You are evading the topic under discussion.

Quote from: TheBigOne on November 08, 2015, 02:11:41 AM

I told you why this was not true. The pressure is caused by the collisions with air molecules. There will be more of these at closer walls.

Scepti didn't really give an answer, so I'll ask you (I haven't seen it mentioned elsewhere), would the pressure difference between the side and ends of the tank have a measurable difference if one were to install gauges at these two locations?

The observer effect would interfere. If you insert a gauge you will change the pressure. It's the same problem with measuring resistance in a circuit, or pressure n a tyre.

Man, pressure has no effect on gravity - or downward acceleration, for gravity deniers. Everybody knows that, and this can be tested. A vaccum chamber can easily reduce pressure to a mere 0,01% of atmospheric pressure with no change to the weight measured of what's inside.

Thebigone's just insane. And we find some joy debating him and seeing him evade so easy questions that utterly disprove his gibberish.

He's even asking to ban some people (me included) so he don't have to see our questions anymore.

Do you take pride in repeating the same arguments, even if they've been dealt with? I'm asking to ban trolls and alts. You are trolling, you are Jadyyn, the rules say you should be banned.

So the laws of physics works differently in a closed box compared to not in a closed box? So air is sentient and knows when it is in a closed box and how to behave when it is in one? Sorry, but just no. You can't evade this one. You specifically claimed that shorter distances have greater pressure. Above you is also NOT a closed box. It is actually LESS closed above you than below you. No matter how you look at it, according to your model we would fall up.

Why does air need to be sentient to be able to move? Pressure can't build up if there's an escape, this is incredibly simple. I made claims relevant only to systems where pressure developed. I have no idea what you're trying to say.

1. You claimed that it was not linear. Now you claim it is not exponential. So is it a polynomial funktion then? But wouldn't that mean that difference in pressure would increase more drastically the greater the ration between two distances are? So when we are on the ground we'd experience an extreme difference in pressure and be blown up? Your model just seems to get worse.

More the inverse of exponential. Log maybe. So?

3. So SOMETHING has to be compressing the air in our atmosphere (Because we know it is compressed). It can't be pressure alone, because pressure would just cause all air to be blown into space. So it is either a dome, UA or gravity then.

Space is fluid. It acts as the barrier. I have explained this before.

It is very close to what you suggested. Spot on, in fact. Making false claims does not make you credible.

Really? You took an example that made you comfortable, and one that wasn't similar to what was under discussion. Take a situation that we've already established could exist: 8n molecules against twice the surface area. Please share how 8/2 =1

Why does air need to be sentient to be able to move? Pressure can't build up if there's an escape, this is incredibly simple. I made claims relevant only to systems where pressure developed. I have no idea what you're trying to say.

What I am trying to say is that pressure can't push us down. Above us is both larger, greater distances and more space for air to escape, than below us. You'd have to violate your own laws of pressure to keep us on the ground with pressure.

More the inverse of exponential. Log maybe. So?

Better. But see above for why it won't matter much. No matter what the absolute cap of the function is, below there should be greater pressure than above.

Space is fluid.[CITATION NEEDED] It acts as the barrier. I have explained this before.

How does it act as a barrier? Why don't it get blown away by the pressure or come back down if it is a fluid? And if air exists inside this fluid (there is literally space down here on earth, or we would not fit on earth) why does it act as a barrier at a specific height above us? And does that not make this barrier more or less of a dome?

Really? You took an example that made you comfortable, and one that wasn't similar to what was under discussion. Take a situation that we've already established could exist: 8n molecules against twice the surface area. Please share how 8/2 =1

Where did you get 8n from? Show me your calculations. These are just random numbers without any context.

Quote from: Kirk Johnson on November 13, 2015, 03:33:32 PM

Quote from: TheBigOne on November 13, 2015, 03:09:48 PM

I call you an alt because you are, jadyyn. You're online at the same times, you have no purpose except to compliment one another and go after the same people. It's all an ego trip, and I see no point in answering questions which have always been answered, jadyyn. Alts get permabanned, low content posters get banned, you really need a time off. Mods, please?

This is no proof. Prove that Jadyyn and I are the same person.

After that: Prove that it changes something relevant to the topic.

The mods can check our IPs and online times. They can verify how stupid you are making these claims.

Proxies exist, and your defensiveness, and how often you're buttbuddies is proof enough.

The existence of proxies does not proof that me and jadyyn are the same person.

Our "defensiveness" also prove nothing. This is a message board: I can defend any argument or statement I wish, since I'm keeping it on-topic.

Try again.

Quote from: 29silhouette on November 13, 2015, 07:19:33 PM

Quote from: TheBigOne on November 08, 2015, 02:11:41 AM

I told you why this was not true. The pressure is caused by the collisions with air molecules. There will be more of these at closer walls.

Scepti didn't really give an answer, so I'll ask you (I haven't seen it mentioned elsewhere), would the pressure difference between the side and ends of the tank have a measurable difference if one were to install gauges at these two locations?

The observer effect would interfere. If you insert a gauge you will change the pressure. It's the same problem with measuring resistance in a circuit, or pressure n a tyre.

I was thinking one would use a non-pressurized tank, drill and tap a hole at the two desired locations, and install screw-in digital gauges (preferably the most accurate possible, but this could also depend on what you would calculate the difference to be given a specified overall pressure), and then pressurize the tank.  Surely this would work as the gauges are pre-installed.

The observer effect would interfere. If you insert a gauge you will change the pressure. It's the same problem with measuring resistance in a circuit, or pressure n a tyre.

This is the stupidest answer I have seen in my entire life.

The change of pressure would be negligible, and would still be possible to measure the weight differences.

1-Put the scale inside the pressure tank.
2- Put something over the scale - a 10kg wwight should be fine.
3- Remove all the pressure it can.
4- See no weight change.
5- Pressurize the tank all the way it can take.
6- See, again, no weight change.
7- Discard denpressure as an explanation to the downward acceleration.
8- Acknowledge "Thebigone" as a troll.