Den Pressure - A Definable Hypothesis & Experiments (Scepti, iWitness)

Quote from: sandmanMike on August 02, 2016, 06:25:20 AM

Quote from: sceptimatic on August 02, 2016, 06:20:12 AM

Quote from: neutrino on August 02, 2016, 06:12:28 AM

Correct me if I'm wrong, but if I will measure weight in vacuum, it should be zero? In absolute vacuum of course.

I have some very precise scales in a lab at your disposal.

Understanding that an absolute vacuum cannot be made on Earth means suspended animation will never be achieved, because that's exactly what the absence of matter would be if we can imagine it.
We have to play with low pressures. That's the best we can do.
The key to evacuating pressure is to understand how it's done. Most people believe they know but the truth is, they don't know. They simply believe they know because the text books tell them that vacuum pumps suck air out. It's not true and is a massive dupe.

Scepti, could you please define.  We are working off of your premise and knowledge here.  We're not hear to say you're wrong, we just want to define your Hypothesis.

Could you please elaborate on how Air Pressure affects weight?

Ok let's put this simply and let's see who has the ability to see it simply.

Imagine a block of Lead and a block of wood and a sponge, all of equal size to the eye.
We know that the Lead is heavier than the wood and the wood is heavier than the sponge.

The reason this is the case is because the Lead repels/resists the atmospheric pressure upon it and the ground is the solid in which the Lead pushes against, so we now perceive a push on push effect.
To measure this effect we use a man made scale plate to place the Lead onto and this now becomes the ground that the Lead pushes against the atmosphere as the atmosphere pushes back by the amount of itself that's been displaced by the actual Lead block.

The wood displaces much less because the wood is much more porous than the Lead and allows atmospheric pressure to saturate it.

The sponge is even more porous and allows the atmosphere to severely saturate it. By how much Each block is pushing back/into the atmosphere, all we have to do is to SQUASH each block until we eject all or most of the atmosphere within the blocks.

The Lead will naturally resist and lose little to no atmosphere within it because there is little in it.

Squeeze the wood and you can at least make its size a quarter of its original. or more, showing that this is the real size of the object for displacing the atmosphere.

The sponge could be squeezed to the size of a pea or more and this shows you how much the sponge was displacing of the atmosphere.

This is the reason why different weight measurements show up for those objects and every other object that is under pressure of push on push.

Now I believe I've explained this perfectly well. I at least expect people to sit back and really ponder it before coming back at me with their thoughts.

Quote from: AdamSK on August 02, 2016, 05:00:48 AM

How about wood and metal, then?  Neither bends at all in response to the wind, but the metal is still much heavier.

Because the metal cannot absorb the amount of atmospheric pressure as the wood can and therefore repels more psi upon is whilst the wood would absorb some of that psi, leaving the pressure upon it, less and therefore less pressure upon your hand or your scale plate.

Quote from: sandmanMike on August 02, 2016, 06:25:20 AM

Scepti, could you please define.  We are working off of your premise and knowledge here.  We're not hear to say you're wrong, we just want to define your Hypothesis.

Could you please elaborate on how Air Pressure affects weight?

Ok let's put this simply and let's see who has the ability to see it simply.

Imagine a block of Lead and a block of wood and a sponge, all of equal size to the eye.
We know that the Lead is heavier than the wood and the wood is heavier than the sponge.

The reason this is the case is because the Lead repels/resists the atmospheric pressure upon it and the ground is the solid in which the Lead pushes against, so we now perceive a push on push effect.
To measure this effect we use a man made scale plate to place the Lead onto and this now becomes the ground that the Lead pushes against the atmosphere as the atmosphere pushes back by the amount of itself that's been displaced by the actual Lead block.

The wood displaces much less because the wood is much more porous than the Lead and allows atmospheric pressure to saturate it.

The sponge is even more porous and allows the atmosphere to severely saturate it. By how much Each block is pushing back/into the atmosphere, all we have to do is to SQUASH each block until we eject all or most of the atmosphere within the blocks.

The Lead will naturally resist and lose little to no atmosphere within it because there is little in it.

Squeeze the wood and you can at least make its size a quarter of its original. or more, showing that this is the real size of the object for displacing the atmosphere.

The sponge could be squeezed to the size of a pea or more and this shows you how much the sponge was displacing of the atmosphere.

This is the reason why different weight measurements show up for those objects and every other object that is under pressure of push on push.

Now I believe I've explained this perfectly well. I at least expect people to sit back and really ponder it before coming back at me with their thoughts.

Quote from: sandmanMike on August 02, 2016, 07:16:49 AM

Thanks Scepti!  Now to find a testable way of measuring this Hypothesis.

The theory is that an object weighs less because it is porous (in other words less dense) and has areas filled with air.  Because of this the air pressure that is applied to it is does not affect the entire object because it's able to flow through the object. 

If all of those areas were then filled with the same substance, then a sponge and a wood that had had the porous areas (for lack of a better word) removed would weigh the same.

Am I understanding that correctly Scepti?

You are understanding it correctly.

Quote from: inquisitive on August 03, 2016, 03:01:52 PM

Quote from: Jane on August 03, 2016, 02:58:53 PM

Quote from: inquisitive on August 03, 2016, 02:57:10 PM

The weight of the brick should therefore be different, depending on the top surface area.

No, it shouldn't. Scepti's point makes sense, if you think of it in terms of essentially inverse-buoyancy. Volume matters more than area.

Please explain more.

The gist seems to be that the force exerted by denpressure is down to the fact that we displace air. It takes a certain amount of force to do that, so there's an equal and opposite reaction on us. We push the upwards-stacked air, and it pushed back. The swimming pool analogy is a good one to get this idea across: just imagine standing on your head (assuming uniform density of the water, if we're being picky). To fully submerge yourself, whether horizontal or vertical, displaces exactly the same amount of water. As such, exactly the same amount of pressure would act on the body.
If you've ever been in a pool, you know the water pushes you up: and yet it's easier to float if you lie on your back than stand up, because when lying the upwards/downwards pressure is spread out.

I'll admit to not being sold on denpressure as a viable model, but it's just silly to claim it can't answer questions which it definitely can.

Quote from: crutonius on August 03, 2016, 03:11:15 PM

If we're looking at the human pyramid effect then the surface area seems pretty important.  Maybe inverse-buoyancy factors into it but that sounds like a different effect. 

Scepti made a point of describing the air like a blanket but the problem with that analogy is that air molecules aren't connected.

Surface area is a factor I believe, but more when it comes to the distribution of force. The total amount of force strictly depends on the volume of air displaced (hence why porous objects would displace less and so exert less force). It's quite neat, actually.
Analogy's analogy, it's never going to be perfect. I will say I don't believe Scepti adheres to the model of molecules you're likely familiar with, but even so bricks don't need to be cemented together to stack.

Quote from: Jane on August 04, 2016, 10:07:09 AM

Quote from: inquisitive on August 04, 2016, 10:01:13 AM

What would you expect 1 litre of air to weigh?

Assuming typical pressure/temperature etc, I make it about 1.3g.

1.225 kg/m³    at 760mm  inside the balloon pressure is higher,  best estimate I can find is 810mm,  and burst at 850mm, the air inside the balloon is more dense because of the higher pressure,  I estimate about 1.3 kg/m³

So if the inflated balloon is about 300 mm diameter,   that equates to a volume of 0.014 m³,   

So the weight gain of the inflated balloon should be 0.014*1300 - 0.014*1225 = 18.2 - 17.2 = approximately 1 grams heavier when inflated.

Given all the variables involved,  the type of balloon material, the changes in temperature,  the size of the balloon inflated,  the above is just a rough estimate.

I have an aircompressor and a set of scales that is accurate to 0.001 grams,  if no-one else does it, I'll get a balloon and do the experiment tomorrow.

Conclusion,  I predict the inflated balloon will be heavier by approximately 1 gram.

EDIT: Corrected volume calculation

Please feel free to correct me on any of this stuff, I will freely admit I'm not an expert on Den Pressure and am only sharing my basic understanding of it based off of what I've grasped these last couple days.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but if I will measure weight in vacuum, it should be zero? In absolute vacuum of course.

I have some very precise scales in a lab at your disposal.

Quote from: sandmanMike on August 02, 2016, 04:42:56 AM

Please feel free to correct me on any of this stuff, I will freely admit I'm not an expert on Den Pressure and am only sharing my basic understanding of it based off of what I've grasped these last couple days.

As all of your experiment are blank, my guess is that you have no understanding of the topic whatsoever.

Quote from: neutrino on August 02, 2016, 06:12:28 AM

Correct me if I'm wrong, but if I will measure weight in vacuum, it should be zero? In absolute vacuum of course.

I have some very precise scales in a lab at your disposal.

Understanding that an absolute vacuum cannot be made on Earth means suspended animation will never be achieved, because that's exactly what the absence of matter would be if we can imagine it.
We have to play with low pressures. That's the best we can do.
The key to evacuating pressure is to understand how it's done. Most people believe they know but the truth is, they don't know. They simply believe they know because the text books tell them that vacuum pumps suck air out. It's not true and is a massive dupe.

The key to evacuating pressure is to understand how it's done. Most people believe they know but the truth is, they don't know. They simply believe they know because the text books tell them that vacuum pumps suck air out. It's not true and is a massive dupe.

Quote from: sceptimatic on August 02, 2016, 06:20:12 AM

Quote from: neutrino on August 02, 2016, 06:12:28 AM

Correct me if I'm wrong, but if I will measure weight in vacuum, it should be zero? In absolute vacuum of course.

I have some very precise scales in a lab at your disposal.

Understanding that an absolute vacuum cannot be made on Earth means suspended animation will never be achieved, because that's exactly what the absence of matter would be if we can imagine it.
We have to play with low pressures. That's the best we can do.
The key to evacuating pressure is to understand how it's done. Most people believe they know but the truth is, they don't know. They simply believe they know because the text books tell them that vacuum pumps suck air out. It's not true and is a massive dupe.

Scepti, could you please define.  We are working off of your premise and knowledge here.  We're not hear to say you're wrong, we just want to define your Hypothesis.

Could you please elaborate on how Air Pressure affects weight?

Quote from: sandmanMike on August 02, 2016, 06:25:20 AM

Quote from: sceptimatic on August 02, 2016, 06:20:12 AM

Quote from: neutrino on August 02, 2016, 06:12:28 AM

Correct me if I'm wrong, but if I will measure weight in vacuum, it should be zero? In absolute vacuum of course.

I have some very precise scales in a lab at your disposal.

Understanding that an absolute vacuum cannot be made on Earth means suspended animation will never be achieved, because that's exactly what the absence of matter would be if we can imagine it.
We have to play with low pressures. That's the best we can do.
The key to evacuating pressure is to understand how it's done. Most people believe they know but the truth is, they don't know. They simply believe they know because the text books tell them that vacuum pumps suck air out. It's not true and is a massive dupe.

Scepti, could you please define.  We are working off of your premise and knowledge here.  We're not hear to say you're wrong, we just want to define your Hypothesis.

Could you please elaborate on how Air Pressure affects weight?

Ok let's put this simply and let's see who has the ability to see it simply.

Imagine a block of Lead and a block of wood and a sponge, all of equal size to the eye.
We know that the Lead is heavier than the wood and the wood is heavier than the sponge.

The reason this is the case is because the Lead repels/resists the atmospheric pressure upon it and the ground is the solid in which the Lead pushes against, so we now perceive a push on push effect.
To measure this effect we use a man made scale plate to place the Lead onto and this now becomes the ground that the Lead pushes against the atmosphere as the atmosphere pushes back by the amount of itself that's been displaced by the actual Lead block.

The wood displaces much less because the wood is much more porous than the Lead and allows atmospheric pressure to saturate it.

The sponge is even more porous and allows the atmosphere to severely saturate it. By how much Each block is pushing back/into the atmosphere, all we have to do is to SQUASH each block until we eject all or most of the atmosphere within the blocks.

The Lead will naturally resist and lose little to no atmosphere within it because there is little in it.

Squeeze the wood and you can at least make its size a quarter of its original. or more, showing that this is the real size of the object for displacing the atmosphere.

The sponge could be squeezed to the size of a pea or more and this shows you how much the sponge was displacing of the atmosphere.

This is the reason why different weight measurements show up for those objects and every other object that is under pressure of push on push.

Now I believe I've explained this perfectly well. I at least expect people to sit back and really ponder it before coming back at me with their thoughts.

Quote from: sceptimatic on August 02, 2016, 07:01:13 AM

Quote from: sandmanMike on August 02, 2016, 06:25:20 AM

Quote from: sceptimatic on August 02, 2016, 06:20:12 AM

Quote from: neutrino on August 02, 2016, 06:12:28 AM

Correct me if I'm wrong, but if I will measure weight in vacuum, it should be zero? In absolute vacuum of course.

I have some very precise scales in a lab at your disposal.

Understanding that an absolute vacuum cannot be made on Earth means suspended animation will never be achieved, because that's exactly what the absence of matter would be if we can imagine it.
We have to play with low pressures. That's the best we can do.
The key to evacuating pressure is to understand how it's done. Most people believe they know but the truth is, they don't know. They simply believe they know because the text books tell them that vacuum pumps suck air out. It's not true and is a massive dupe.

Scepti, could you please define.  We are working off of your premise and knowledge here.  We're not hear to say you're wrong, we just want to define your Hypothesis.

Could you please elaborate on how Air Pressure affects weight?

Ok let's put this simply and let's see who has the ability to see it simply.

Imagine a block of Lead and a block of wood and a sponge, all of equal size to the eye.
We know that the Lead is heavier than the wood and the wood is heavier than the sponge.

The reason this is the case is because the Lead repels/resists the atmospheric pressure upon it and the ground is the solid in which the Lead pushes against, so we now perceive a push on push effect.
To measure this effect we use a man made scale plate to place the Lead onto and this now becomes the ground that the Lead pushes against the atmosphere as the atmosphere pushes back by the amount of itself that's been displaced by the actual Lead block.

The wood displaces much less because the wood is much more porous than the Lead and allows atmospheric pressure to saturate it.

The sponge is even more porous and allows the atmosphere to severely saturate it. By how much Each block is pushing back/into the atmosphere, all we have to do is to SQUASH each block until we eject all or most of the atmosphere within the blocks.

The Lead will naturally resist and lose little to no atmosphere within it because there is little in it.

Squeeze the wood and you can at least make its size a quarter of its original. or more, showing that this is the real size of the object for displacing the atmosphere.

The sponge could be squeezed to the size of a pea or more and this shows you how much the sponge was displacing of the atmosphere.

This is the reason why different weight measurements show up for those objects and every other object that is under pressure of push on push.

Now I believe I've explained this perfectly well. I at least expect people to sit back and really ponder it before coming back at me with their thoughts.

Thanks Scepti!  Now to find a testable way of measuring this Hypothesis.

The theory is that an object weighs less because it is porous (in other words less dense) and has areas filled with air.  Because of this the air pressure that is applied to it is does not affect the entire object because it's able to flow through the object. 

If all of those areas were then filled with the same substance, then a sponge and a wood that had had the porous areas (for lack of a better word) removed would weigh the same.

Am I understanding that correctly Scepti?

The Lead will naturally resist and lose little to no atmosphere within it because there is little in it.

Quote from: neutrino on August 02, 2016, 06:12:28 AM

Correct me if I'm wrong, but if I will measure weight in vacuum, it should be zero? In absolute vacuum of course.

I have some very precise scales in a lab at your disposal.

Understanding that an absolute vacuum cannot be made on Earth means suspended animation will never be achieved, because that's exactly what the absence of matter would be if we can imagine it.
We have to play with low pressures. That's the best we can do.
The key to evacuating pressure is to understand how it's done. Most people believe they know but the truth is, they don't know. They simply believe they know because the text books tell them that vacuum pumps suck air out. It's not true and is a massive dupe.

Quote from: sceptimatic on August 02, 2016, 06:20:12 AM

Quote from: neutrino on August 02, 2016, 06:12:28 AM

Correct me if I'm wrong, but if I will measure weight in vacuum, it should be zero? In absolute vacuum of course.

I have some very precise scales in a lab at your disposal.

Understanding that an absolute vacuum cannot be made on Earth means suspended animation will never be achieved, because that's exactly what the absence of matter would be if we can imagine it.
We have to play with low pressures. That's the best we can do.
The key to evacuating pressure is to understand how it's done. Most people believe they know but the truth is, they don't know. They simply believe they know because the text books tell them that vacuum pumps suck air out. It's not true and is a massive dupe.

Let's not gloss over this last point as its critically important. How are the textbooks duping everyone here?

I can think of several ways to verify that a vacuum chamber in fact has a vacuum.

The carburetor / fuel injection system relies on a vacuum to fuel an internal combustion engine.

If we evacuate a chamber with a balloon in it we'll see it expand.

If we evacuate a chamber filled with smoke we'll see it become clearer and clearer.

So where are we going wrong here? What effect are we actually seeing?

I want to know more about what is physically occurring.  What does "porous" mean? 

Is air trying to find its way into metal?

Is air trying to form a chemical reaction to metal? failing which, the consequences are denpressure?

What is a block of tungsten doing more that a block of lead can only do less?

Let's not gloss over this last point as its critically important. How are the textbooks duping everyone here?

I can think of several ways to verify that a vacuum chamber in fact has a vacuum.

The carburetor / fuel injection system relies on a vacuum to fuel an internal combustion engine.

If we evacuate a chamber with a balloon in it we'll see it expand.

If we evacuate a chamber filled with smoke we'll see it become clearer and clearer.

So where are we going wrong here? What effect are we actually seeing?

Quote from: crutonius on August 02, 2016, 07:34:03 AM

Quote from: sceptimatic on August 02, 2016, 06:20:12 AM

Quote from: neutrino on August 02, 2016, 06:12:28 AM

Correct me if I'm wrong, but if I will measure weight in vacuum, it should be zero? In absolute vacuum of course.

I have some very precise scales in a lab at your disposal.

Understanding that an absolute vacuum cannot be made on Earth means suspended animation will never be achieved, because that's exactly what the absence of matter would be if we can imagine it.
We have to play with low pressures. That's the best we can do.
The key to evacuating pressure is to understand how it's done. Most people believe they know but the truth is, they don't know. They simply believe they know because the text books tell them that vacuum pumps suck air out. It's not true and is a massive dupe.

Let's not gloss over this last point as its critically important. How are the textbooks duping everyone here?

I can think of several ways to verify that a vacuum chamber in fact has a vacuum.

The carburetor / fuel injection system relies on a vacuum to fuel an internal combustion engine.

If we evacuate a chamber with a balloon in it we'll see it expand.

If we evacuate a chamber filled with smoke we'll see it become clearer and clearer.

So where are we going wrong here? What effect are we actually seeing?

Let's keep this on topic, we're not hear to define vacuum.  We're hear to define and test Den Pressure.

By how much Each block is pushing back/into the atmosphere, all we have to do is to SQUASH each block until we eject all or most of the atmosphere within the blocks.
The Lead will naturally resist and lose little to no atmosphere within it because there is little in it.
This is the reason why different weight measurements show up for those objects and every other object that is under pressure of push on push.

Scepti, would you say Experiment 1 would be fair and accurate test of the Hypothesis Presented?

So if we use a vacuum pump on an enclosed space, will that reduce the weight of the objects therein?

Quote from: sandmanMike on August 02, 2016, 07:42:01 AM

Quote from: crutonius on August 02, 2016, 07:34:03 AM

Quote from: sceptimatic on August 02, 2016, 06:20:12 AM

Quote from: neutrino on August 02, 2016, 06:12:28 AM

Correct me if I'm wrong, but if I will measure weight in vacuum, it should be zero? In absolute vacuum of course.

I have some very precise scales in a lab at your disposal.

Understanding that an absolute vacuum cannot be made on Earth means suspended animation will never be achieved, because that's exactly what the absence of matter would be if we can imagine it.
We have to play with low pressures. That's the best we can do.
The key to evacuating pressure is to understand how it's done. Most people believe they know but the truth is, they don't know. They simply believe they know because the text books tell them that vacuum pumps suck air out. It's not true and is a massive dupe.

Let's not gloss over this last point as its critically important. How are the textbooks duping everyone here?

I can think of several ways to verify that a vacuum chamber in fact has a vacuum.

The carburetor / fuel injection system relies on a vacuum to fuel an internal combustion engine.

If we evacuate a chamber with a balloon in it we'll see it expand.

If we evacuate a chamber filled with smoke we'll see it become clearer and clearer.

So where are we going wrong here? What effect are we actually seeing?

Let's keep this on topic, we're not hear to define vacuum.  We're hear to define and test Den Pressure.

Alright. Your thread your rules.

So basically porosity = weight?  So what we would expect to see is that anything impermeable must weigh more than anything porous?

Quote from: sceptimatic on August 02, 2016, 07:01:13 AM

By how much Each block is pushing back/into the atmosphere, all we have to do is to SQUASH each block until we eject all or most of the atmosphere within the blocks.
The Lead will naturally resist and lose little to no atmosphere within it because there is little in it.
This is the reason why different weight measurements show up for those objects and every other object that is under pressure of push on push.

So if we have a fist-sized lump of lead and a fist-sized diamond, the diamond will be much easier to squash because it is so much lighter than the lead?