iWitness - Air Pressure and Weight

  • 411 Replies
  • 61931 Views
Re: iWitness - Air Pressure and Weight
« Reply #390 on: August 12, 2016, 07:44:54 AM »
Quote
So an atom  has 63 smaller atoms stuck to it? Explain in simplistic terms.

No, an atom is made of up to 63 particle types that are smaller than an atom. These smaller than an atom particles are what we refer to as sub-atomic particles. Examples are electrons, protons neutrons, photons, quarks, leptons etc etc.

Quote
So if all atoms are fixed and are all the same size and do not expand or shrink, then how do they actually make up a structure that basically gels?

No, all atoms are not the same size, atoms of different elements have differing sizes. Atoms of the same element are the same size. The size of an atom is determined by how many of the different sub-atomic particles the atom is made of. The table of periodic elements describes exactly this relationship.

Quote
Let me explain. In denpressure theory, any molecules expand and contract within dense objects, creating more or less push on each other. This can attract or repel as we know it. Basically push together or push away.

To push together as in the case of a window clamp as a big simplistic instance, we can see that the bond to the window is due to the expansion of matter against the compression of matter. Or to us, it's evacuating pressure by force upon an object to add to the external force upon that object, which creates what we could construe as basically GLUED on.

Go right down the scale like this for anything and that is exactly what's happening.

No, at the atomic scale, the "glue" that binds atoms together is the atomic charge of the atom. It is this charge that is the reason we have electricity, "denpressure" has nothing to do with it.

I know guys, I have oversimplified things a little, but I'm trying to talk to Scepti so forgive me, lol.
Ok then, show me the 63 particle type that are smaller than the atom and let's go from there.

Google them for yourself.
No problem. I just wanted to know if you'd seen these 63 smaller atoms. Obviously you haven't and are simply going on story telling.

If personally seeing them is your ...yard stick, then I'd suggest you spend some time investigating your own assertions until you personally see them as well, no?
Turkish joke. A prisoner goes to the jail's library to borrow a book. The librarian says: "We don't have this book, but we have its author"

*

sceptimatic

  • Flat Earth Scientist
  • 30061
Re: iWitness - Air Pressure and Weight
« Reply #391 on: August 12, 2016, 07:48:48 AM »


Can you?

Where are horizontal forces?
They are created when any dense object pushes into the vertical. It squeezes against you as you push the atmosphere out of the way, or compress it up.

Quote
Why nitrogen decides to change its position when liquified?
What do you mean?

Quote
Why things fall deeper than they were produced?
I'll have to use water to get you to grasp this one. I shouldn't need to but what the hell.
Imagine you dig a hole under water but you cap off the sea bed so no water gets into your hole.
.
Ok now you place a coin or whatever object on top of the cap.
Now pull away the cap and what happens?

The water that was held back now fills the hole and pushes the coin to the bottom.

Just think of doing this against atmosphere, as in your hole digging would be sort of digging in a low pressure chamber and then opening that chamber to the atmosphere to equalise the pressure.
This is what's happening.
Don't leave me hanging now when it is important.
You need to think a bit deeper.

*

sceptimatic

  • Flat Earth Scientist
  • 30061
Re: iWitness - Air Pressure and Weight
« Reply #392 on: August 12, 2016, 07:52:17 AM »
Quote
So an atom  has 63 smaller atoms stuck to it? Explain in simplistic terms.

No, an atom is made of up to 63 particle types that are smaller than an atom. These smaller than an atom particles are what we refer to as sub-atomic particles. Examples are electrons, protons neutrons, photons, quarks, leptons etc etc.

Quote
So if all atoms are fixed and are all the same size and do not expand or shrink, then how do they actually make up a structure that basically gels?

No, all atoms are not the same size, atoms of different elements have differing sizes. Atoms of the same element are the same size. The size of an atom is determined by how many of the different sub-atomic particles the atom is made of. The table of periodic elements describes exactly this relationship.

Quote
Let me explain. In denpressure theory, any molecules expand and contract within dense objects, creating more or less push on each other. This can attract or repel as we know it. Basically push together or push away.

To push together as in the case of a window clamp as a big simplistic instance, we can see that the bond to the window is due to the expansion of matter against the compression of matter. Or to us, it's evacuating pressure by force upon an object to add to the external force upon that object, which creates what we could construe as basically GLUED on.

Go right down the scale like this for anything and that is exactly what's happening.

No, at the atomic scale, the "glue" that binds atoms together is the atomic charge of the atom. It is this charge that is the reason we have electricity, "denpressure" has nothing to do with it.

I know guys, I have oversimplified things a little, but I'm trying to talk to Scepti so forgive me, lol.
Ok then, show me the 63 particle type that are smaller than the atom and let's go from there.

Google them for yourself.
No problem. I just wanted to know if you'd seen these 63 smaller atoms. Obviously you haven't and are simply going on story telling.

If personally seeing them is your ...yard stick, then I'd suggest you spend some time investigating your own assertions until you personally see them as well, no?
But I can see what's happening. It's complete logic.
My molecules work better than yours. Mine are simpler.

You're working from nonsense stories at best.
I said to Jane that was was going to do a few little diagrams of my molecules and how they react. I haven't plucked up the mind to start to doodle on the ms paint but I will soon enough, just to show what's happening.

Re: iWitness - Air Pressure and Weight
« Reply #393 on: August 12, 2016, 08:33:31 AM »
You could draw thousands of diagrams, it wouldn't change the fact that you can't see what's going on either. Your particles are certainly simpler but they do not accurately reflect reality. To believe particles behave in the way you think they do requires a denial of several measurable facts. You could measure them yourself but you are too stubborn.

*

sceptimatic

  • Flat Earth Scientist
  • 30061
Re: iWitness - Air Pressure and Weight
« Reply #394 on: August 12, 2016, 08:45:28 AM »
You could draw thousands of diagrams, it wouldn't change the fact that you can't see what's going on either. Your particles are certainly simpler but they do not accurately reflect reality. To believe particles behave in the way you think they do requires a denial of several measurable facts. You could measure them yourself but you are too stubborn.
You're right about not seeing them in reality. They would just remain a theoretical diagram.
The funny thing is, so is your model. All diagrams and story telling coupled with a bit of absolute bullshit mixed in to dupe wannabe scientists.

It's shameful to be honest.
I suppose to find the reality would be to find the reality. It basically means you'd find out what you really are and where you really are in the food chain of Earth's cell.

Stay ignorant and arrogant for the model bestowed upon you. It's a model that requires no thought. It's clever isn't it. All there on a plate so you don't have to think for yourself.

Want to know why?
Because you're not required nor wanted to think for yourself. Just  memorise the models put in front of you and watch the videos and pictures set out for you.
Copy the maths that gives a real impression and bingo, you're a fully fledged member of the INDOC club.



Re: iWitness - Air Pressure and Weight
« Reply #395 on: August 12, 2016, 09:21:24 AM »
You could draw thousands of diagrams, it wouldn't change the fact that you can't see what's going on either. Your particles are certainly simpler but they do not accurately reflect reality. To believe particles behave in the way you think they do requires a denial of several measurable facts. You could measure them yourself but you are too stubborn.
You're right about not seeing them in reality. They would just remain a theoretical diagram.
The funny thing is, so is your model. All diagrams and story telling coupled with a bit of absolute bullshit mixed in to dupe wannabe scientists..

So we have 2 diagrams that are meant to describe reality. To believe one diagram, you must deny the fact that evacuation chambers exist, and the fact that you can build your own.

You must deny the fact that we have been to space, and the fact that you can build your own telescope to observe man made objects in space.

You must believe that the sun and moon are just projections that come from within the earth, despite the fact that you have no evidence corroborating this theory.

You must deny the fact that you cannot make a solid that is less dense than a gas (talking about The Dome here). How do you know anything about the properties of matter near the dome if you have never seen it?

You must deny the methods with which we collected solid hydrogen. Don't believe it? Try doing it yourself, see how far you get.

There are so many things that you have to shut your eyes to. So many things you could check yourself, but you refuse to. You would rather pretend you are some genius. Nobody else could possibly grasp your sheer intellect. You are a special snowflake, everybody else is fooled but not you!

*

sceptimatic

  • Flat Earth Scientist
  • 30061
Re: iWitness - Air Pressure and Weight
« Reply #396 on: August 12, 2016, 09:44:59 AM »
So we have 2 diagrams that are meant to describe reality. To believe one diagram, you must deny the fact that evacuation chambers exist, and the fact that you can build your own.
To believe your diagram/thought (bridge analogy) it does mean that evacuation chambers could not exist.
My analogy means they can exist.



You must deny the fact that we have been to space, and the fact that you can build your own telescope to observe man made objects in space.
Absolutely I deny space and anything supposedly seen physically in it. Space being outside of an atmosphere. We must make sure that this is clear.


You must believe that the sun and moon are just projections that come from within the earth, despite the fact that you have no evidence corroborating this theory.
Just a theory based on my overall logical  theory of thought.
It's fine for you people to have gravity and warped space time and black holes and worm holes and Higgs boson, etc etc etc etc etc, with absolutely no evidence, except to say there is.
Strange isn't it?



You must deny the fact that you cannot make a solid that is less dense than a gas (talking about The Dome here). How do you know anything about the properties of matter near the dome if you have never seen it?
You need to understand that you do not reside at the dome and never will. You also need to try and grasp my theory and stop stamping your feet every time you get told. You're distracting yourself, whether naively or deliberately. Let's hope for your intelligence that you are doing it deliberately, because if not, you;re taking one hell of a long time to grasp the extreme simplest piece of info.

You must deny the methods with which we collected solid hydrogen. Don't believe it? Try doing it yourself, see how far you get.
Tell me about your experiment to get solid hydrogen. Did you do this at home?

There are so many things that you have to shut your eyes to. So many things you could check yourself, but you refuse to. You would rather pretend you are some genius. Nobody else could possibly grasp your sheer intellect. You are a special snowflake, everybody else is fooled but not you!
I am a genius. I'm a simplistic genius. I see things that many don't. I turn the complicated into the less complicated so that the normal every day person can get the chance to grasp stuff.
I am a normal every day person just as most are.
Those that are not in the category I mention, are those that believe they are top scientists who prefer to follow the round the block procedures of science rather than simply taking the direct route.
the reason why science is made into gobbledygook is so the average Joe doesn't bother to attempt to decipher the reality within it.


Re: iWitness - Air Pressure and Weight
« Reply #397 on: August 12, 2016, 10:30:21 AM »
Your claims about the dome contradict your own theory. You claim the particles at the dome expand to their fullest extent (still waiting on you to tell us how big this is) and then they freeze. These particles FREEZE at their LOWEST POSSIBLE DENSITY.

Tell me 1 element that is less dense as a solid than it is as a gas. It makes no logical sense.

*

sceptimatic

  • Flat Earth Scientist
  • 30061
Re: iWitness - Air Pressure and Weight
« Reply #398 on: August 12, 2016, 10:40:40 AM »
Your claims about the dome contradict your own theory. You claim the particles at the dome expand to their fullest extent (still waiting on you to tell us how big this is) and then they freeze. These particles FREEZE at their LOWEST POSSIBLE DENSITY.

Tell me 1 element that is less dense as a solid than it is as a gas. It makes no logical sense.

Re: iWitness - Air Pressure and Weight
« Reply #399 on: August 12, 2016, 10:43:39 AM »
You must believe that the sun and moon are just projections that come from within the earth, despite the fact that you have no evidence corroborating this theory.
Just a theory based on my overall logical  theory of thought.
It's fine for you people to have gravity and warped space time and black holes and worm holes and Higgs boson, etc etc etc etc etc, with absolutely no evidence, except to say there is.
Strange isn't it?

No. What's strange is you think the supercollider at CERN is some kind of billion-dollar international hoax, or it doesn't really exist. I wonder what those scientists do all day.

I really wish I knew what kind of "logical" thought would lead you to believe such a massive source of light and heat could be reflected off of a dome that is supposedly near absolute zero. I have no idea where on earth you think these images come from, how they move across the sky, what accounts for all the stars in the night sky, why the moon has phases, or what causes eclipses. All of these simple observations have gone unanswered on your part.

For somebody who needs to see atoms for himself in order to believe they exist, you sure make a lot of baseless assumptions.

Re: iWitness - Air Pressure and Weight
« Reply #400 on: August 12, 2016, 10:45:55 AM »
Your claims about the dome contradict your own theory. You claim the particles at the dome expand to their fullest extent (still waiting on you to tell us how big this is) and then they freeze. These particles FREEZE at their LOWEST POSSIBLE DENSITY.

Tell me 1 element that is less dense as a solid than it is as a gas. It makes no logical sense.


Haha you think that tin foil ship is floating on GASEOUS TIN? No, it's floating on carbon dioxide. Make a boat out of dry ice and see if it floats on CO2

*

sceptimatic

  • Flat Earth Scientist
  • 30061
Re: iWitness - Air Pressure and Weight
« Reply #401 on: August 12, 2016, 10:56:07 AM »
No. What's strange is you think the supercollider at CERN is some kind of billion-dollar international hoax, or it doesn't really exist. I wonder what those scientists do all day.
It is a hoax and there are no real scientists there.


I really wish I knew what kind of "logical" thought would lead you to believe such a massive source of light and heat could be reflected off of a dome that is supposedly near absolute zero.
I can't help it if you can't understand it. You don't really attempt to.

I have no idea where on earth you think these images come from, how they move across the sky, what accounts for all the stars in the night sky, why the moon has phases, or what causes eclipses. All of these simple observations have gone unanswered on your part.
You have to try and understand what the centre of Earth offers - or could offer, instead of thinking you walk about on a ball spinning around a 3 million mile distant 870,000 mile diameter ball of frigging nuclear so called fusion.


For somebody who needs to see atoms for himself in order to believe they exist, you sure make a lot of baseless assumptions.
Unfortunately I don't  have anything else to work from. All I see are stories and lies. I have to try and decipher the bullshit. It's not easy when most of the world of humans are brainwashed and hypnotised to believe in absolute illogical nonsense..

*

sceptimatic

  • Flat Earth Scientist
  • 30061
Re: iWitness - Air Pressure and Weight
« Reply #402 on: August 12, 2016, 10:57:42 AM »
Your claims about the dome contradict your own theory. You claim the particles at the dome expand to their fullest extent (still waiting on you to tell us how big this is) and then they freeze. These particles FREEZE at their LOWEST POSSIBLE DENSITY.

Tell me 1 element that is less dense as a solid than it is as a gas. It makes no logical sense.


Haha you think that tin foil ship is floating on GASEOUS TIN? No, it's floating on carbon dioxide. Make a boat out of dry ice and see if it floats on CO2
You said:
Tell me 1 element that is less dense as a solid than it is as a gas. It makes no logical sense.

I merely showed you a video.

Re: iWitness - Air Pressure and Weight
« Reply #403 on: August 12, 2016, 11:08:08 AM »
No. What's strange is you think the supercollider at CERN is some kind of billion-dollar international hoax, or it doesn't really exist. I wonder what those scientists do all day.
It is a hoax and there are no real scientists there.
CITATION NEEDED

I suppose all those governments spent years and billions of dollars constructing a gigantic underground circle on a joke? How do you know it's not there? Have you been to Switzerland or eastern France? Unless you have personally been there, how could you denounce it as a hoax?

I really wish I knew what kind of "logical" thought would lead you to believe such a massive source of light and heat could be reflected off of a dome that is supposedly near absolute zero.
I can't help it if you can't understand it. You don't really attempt to.

I have attempted to. I have asked you to exolain your reasoning many times. You have given no explanation. I have no idea why nobody has discovered such a huge energy source if you claim that it exists.

I have no idea where on earth you think these images come from, how they move across the sky, what accounts for all the stars in the night sky, why the moon has phases, or what causes eclipses. All of these simple observations have gone unanswered on your part.
You have to try and understand what the centre of Earth offers - or could offer, instead of thinking you walk about on a ball spinning around a 3 million mile distant 870,000 mile diameter ball of frigging nuclear so called fusion.
What does the center of the earth look like in your model? You have given no attempt to even describe it.

Do you have proof nuclear fusion is a lie? Try going near the Bikini Atoll on your boat sometime, see how long it takes for you to develop cancer.

For somebody who needs to see atoms for himself in order to believe they exist, you sure make a lot of baseless assumptions.
Unfortunately I don't  have anything else to work from. All I see are stories and lies. I have to try and decipher the bullshit. It's not easy when most of the world of humans are brainwashed and hypnotised to believe in absolute illogical nonsense..

All I see when I look at denpressure are stories and lies. You have not done one experiment that proves your thinking. You are not trying to find the truth, you are simply trying to stand out. Your life is so dull and pathetic you must invent your own laws of physics to create a world where you have the most ingenious mind and everybody else has been fooled by stories. Let's assume for a minute that you have convinced anybody besides iWitness. You would have people trust that what you are telling them is the truth, even though you have no evidence?

You are hypocrisy personified.

?

Woody

  • 1144
Re: iWitness - Air Pressure and Weight
« Reply #404 on: August 12, 2016, 11:26:53 AM »
Your claims about the dome contradict your own theory. You claim the particles at the dome expand to their fullest extent (still waiting on you to tell us how big this is) and then they freeze. These particles FREEZE at their LOWEST POSSIBLE DENSITY.

Tell me 1 element that is less dense as a solid than it is as a gas. It makes no logical sense.


Haha you think that tin foil ship is floating on GASEOUS TIN? No, it's floating on carbon dioxide. Make a boat out of dry ice and see if it floats on CO2
You said:
Tell me 1 element that is less dense as a solid than it is as a gas. It makes no logical sense.

I merely showed you a video.

No. He said show him 1 element that is less dense as a solid than it is a gas.

The important part is " 1 element'

What you showed  is two different elements.  Unless you are claiming that video is aluminum foil floating on aluminum gas the video is not what was requested.

*

SpJunk

  • 577
Re: iWitness - Air Pressure and Weight
« Reply #405 on: August 12, 2016, 02:27:53 PM »

Where are horizontal forces?
They are created when any dense object pushes into the vertical. It squeezes against you as you push the atmosphere out of the way, or compress it up.

You didn't understand my question.
It is easy for vertical displacement.
If you push solid object vertical, it will create pressure to push that object back down.

I was asking for horizontal displacement.
If you push solid object horizontally. For example to the east.
Where is the pressure to push that object back to the west?

Why nitrogen decides to change its position when liquified?
What do you mean?
I mean, same element (nitrogen), same set of molecules, sits comfortably in the middle of the air.
When you reduce temperature and liquify it, it decides to fall down.
Why?
"If the facts don't fit the theory, change the facts." - Albert Einstein

"Your lack of simplicity is main reason why not many people would bother to try to understand you." - S.M.

Re: iWitness - Air Pressure and Weight
« Reply #406 on: August 12, 2016, 04:29:01 PM »
Scepti, if I may ask, from person to person, without a single malicious intent on my behalf, can you tell me about your educational attainment and religious beliefs. No need to explain or justify the why of it.
Turkish joke. A prisoner goes to the jail's library to borrow a book. The librarian says: "We don't have this book, but we have its author"

*

neutrino

  • 635
  • FET is a religion. You can't fight faith.
Re: iWitness - Air Pressure and Weight
« Reply #407 on: August 12, 2016, 04:57:31 PM »
Can't believe you are still discussing this. Didn't we prove that denpressure is false?



more here: https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=67602.0
FET is religion. No evidence will convince a FE-er. It would be easier to convince Muslims they are wrong.

Re: iWitness - Air Pressure and Weight
« Reply #408 on: August 12, 2016, 05:09:09 PM »
Scepti, what is happening is that the tin boat + the air inside the boat is less dense than the air outside of it. If you made the boat out of solid tin, it wouldn't float at all.
I wonder how obnoxious I can make my signature?
Please give me ideas.

Re: iWitness - Air Pressure and Weight
« Reply #409 on: August 13, 2016, 07:50:00 AM »
Scepti, just to be clear, are atoms a solid mass configured like "bubbles in a sink" with no empty space in between?  I seem to recall you stating as such.
I didn't mention atoms but we can use atoms if it makes it all more easily accepted for explanations.
There is never empty space and when I say empty, I mean a true vacuum in Earth's cell. Outside of it who knows what. Possibly infinite similar Earth's - but that's not important right now.
What is important is understanding that gravity is crap and denpressure is the reality of how we exist in our Earth prison cell.
Here's what I'm curious about.  If air and metal are both a solid mass of atoms/molecules/particles, or whatever you feel they are, and you say there is no empty space between any of these particles, then how does air pressure pass through metal like aluminum easier than it does through some other metal that is heavier?

*

Definitely Not Swedish

  • rutabaga
  • 8309
  • Flat Earth Inspector General of High Fashion Crime
Re: iWitness - Air Pressure and Weight
« Reply #410 on: August 13, 2016, 08:45:32 AM »
I am a genius. I'm a simplistic genius. I see things that many don't. I turn the complicated into the less complicated so that the normal every day person can get the chance to grasp stuff.

 ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D
Quote from: croutons, the s.o.w.
You have received a warning for breaking the laws of mathematics.

Member of the BOTD
Sign up here.

*

sokarul

  • 19303
  • Extra Racist
Re: iWitness - Air Pressure and Weight
« Reply #411 on: August 14, 2016, 10:03:30 AM »
Your claims about the dome contradict your own theory. You claim the particles at the dome expand to their fullest extent (still waiting on you to tell us how big this is) and then they freeze. These particles FREEZE at their LOWEST POSSIBLE DENSITY.

Tell me 1 element that is less dense as a solid than it is as a gas. It makes no logical sense.


Haha you think that tin foil ship is floating on GASEOUS TIN? No, it's floating on carbon dioxide. Make a boat out of dry ice and see if it floats on CO2
You said:
Tell me 1 element that is less dense as a solid than it is as a gas. It makes no logical sense.

I merely showed you a video.
That is not a video showing tin being less dense than CO2. Please learn how ships float and then report back.
ANNIHILATOR OF  SHIFTER

It's no slur if it's fact.