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

Quote from: Aliveandkicking on August 28, 2016, 07:17:23 AM

But what on Earth is the part in red talking about?? 

1.  What is getting pushed out by the molecules inside the chamber that are trying to expand?? 

2. What is constantly connected??

1. The molecules closer to the pump.
2. Badly phrased, ok, the idea is essentially molecules are always touching other molecules; no vacuum forms.

Thanks.   After what you have now given me,    the first part which was expressed strangely is not making any sense at all.    The emphasis there was on pushing away the atmosphere surrounding the pump.    However the pump works by being full of air at atmospheric pressure when it starts working and then forcing that air out into the surrounding air - pushing away the air perhaps - but this air is not connected to the container because the valve to the container is closed.    The inside of the cylinder was another container which has just been emptied forcibly.   OK so the piston is at the top of the cylinder and now all the valves are closed and the piston creates a 'vacuum' inside the cylinder as it goes back to the bottom of the cylinder and the valve to the container opens and the molecules in the container can enter the cylinder and the cycle continues.

So how does the pump work in the sceptimatic universe?

Thanks.   After what you have now given me,    the first part which was expressed strangely is not making any sense at all.    The emphasis there was on pushing away the atmosphere surrounding the pump.    However the pump works by being full of air at atmospheric pressure when it starts working and then forcing that air out into the surrounding air - pushing away the air perhaps - but this air is not connected to the container because the valve to the container is closed.    The inside of the cylinder was another container which has just been emptied forcibly.   OK so the piston is at the top of the cylinder and now all the valves are closed and the piston creates a 'vacuum' inside the cylinder as it goes back to the bottom of the cylinder and the valve to the container opens and the molecules in the container can enter the cylinder and the cycle continues.

So how does the pump work in the sceptimatic universe?

The main principle just seems to be that the pump acts to prevent molecules from the outside getting in.
That's all that's necessary: it means there's no pressure acting inwards at the point of the pump, so there is a direction for the molecules inside to expand towards. The pump always acts that way: it prevents air from the outside going into the chamber.

So let's try this another way.

We fill a container with another gas. Say butane gas. The container is full of this.

Now we use a pump to empty the container while making sure no air is let back into the container. The butane has now left the container. We can now prove that first there was butane (the butane could be released and set fire to) but now there isn't anymore. We emptied the container with the pump.

What is left in the container?

So let's try this another way.

We fill a container with another gas. Say butane gas. The container is full of this.

Now we use a pump to empty the container while making sure no air is let back into the container. The butane has now left the container. We can now prove that first there was butane (the butane could be released and set fire to) but now there isn't anymore. We emptied the container with the pump.

What is left in the container?

If you filled the container exclusively with butane and there was nothing else in there, you would not have been able to apply enough force to fully empty it.

Quote from: Aliveandkicking on August 28, 2016, 07:52:13 AM

Thanks.   After what you have now given me,    the first part which was expressed strangely is not making any sense at all.    The emphasis there was on pushing away the atmosphere surrounding the pump.    However the pump works by being full of air at atmospheric pressure when it starts working and then forcing that air out into the surrounding air - pushing away the air perhaps - but this air is not connected to the container because the valve to the container is closed.    The inside of the cylinder was another container which has just been emptied forcibly.   OK so the piston is at the top of the cylinder and now all the valves are closed and the piston creates a 'vacuum' inside the cylinder as it goes back to the bottom of the cylinder and the valve to the container opens and the molecules in the container can enter the cylinder and the cycle continues.

So how does the pump work in the sceptimatic universe?

The main principle just seems to be that the pump acts to prevent molecules from the outside getting in.
That's all that's necessary: it means there's no pressure acting inwards at the point of the pump, so there is a direction for the molecules inside to expand towards. The pump always acts that way: it prevents air from the outside going into the chamber.

Lets go thru it again.  An ordinary 'vacuum'pump works  by creating the best low pressure area it can do so inside the pump.    Your description however is only talking about pushing air away from the pump.    An ordinary pump also 'pushes air away from the pump'

Your description is also talking about the air molecules being connected which is not making any sense so far.

A vacuum pump works by creating a small container which is separated from the larger container.   How is the air connected if the pump creates a separate container which is hidden from the container by a set of valves?   

Is there a reducing number of molecules inside the container as the pump runs?

What exactly is passing out of the exhaust of the pump?

So let's try this another way.

We fill a container with another gas. Say butane gas. The container is full of this.

Now we use a pump to empty the container while making sure no air is let back into the container. The butane has now left the container. We can now prove that first there was butane (the butane could be released and set fire to) but now there isn't anymore. We emptied the container with the pump.

What is left in the container?

In the real world using an ordinary single stage vacuum pump the valves leak sufficiently that when you finish running the pump the container has a small amount of air in it.

Quote from: Omega on August 28, 2016, 08:15:59 AM

So let's try this another way.

We fill a container with another gas. Say butane gas. The container is full of this.

Now we use a pump to empty the container while making sure no air is let back into the container. The butane has now left the container. We can now prove that first there was butane (the butane could be released and set fire to) but now there isn't anymore. We emptied the container with the pump.

What is left in the container?

If you filled the container exclusively with butane and there was nothing else in there, you would not have been able to apply enough force to fully empty it.

OK so butane passes out of the exhaust valve.

What exactly is connected together??   Most of the butane is spread hundreds of meters away and the remaining  contents of the container are trapped behind metal valves.

Why is there an emphasis on connection??   Connection to what??

Lets go thru it again.  An ordinary 'vacuum'pump works  by creating the best low pressure area it can do so inside the pump.    Your description however is only talking about pushing air away from the pump.    An ordinary pump also 'pushes air away from the pump'

Your description is also talking about the air molecules being connected which is not making any sense so far.

A vacuum pump works by creating a small container which is separated from the larger container.   How is the air connected if the pump creates a separate container which is hidden from the container by a set of valves?   

Is there a reducing number of molecules inside the container as the pump runs?

What exactly is passing out of the exhaust of the pump?

It might be easier to do this with a few examples. First, you were the one that mentioned molecules being connected together under this model: to my knowledge, that's basically because molecules are always touching other molecules, and there's no gap not filled by a molecule. That's all it is. It doesn't mean one area of air has to be touching every other area of air. Nature abhors a vacuum, so when the molecules have energy to they will expand to fill any empty space. Consider that a key axiom of the model.
Another key point is that according to Scepti 'pull' forces are impossible: everything's a push.

Let's suppose we have a simple airtight container, with a lower pressure of air than the outside in. There's no way in or out (in an ideal situation). There's more force on the outside of the container than the inside, but it can withstand it. This is case A.
If we flip it so there's a higher pressure on the air inside the container, then there's more force on the inside. This is case B.

Let's poke a hole in the container. Now, in case A, the higher pressure on the outside has something to do: it pushes its way in, so air flows inside, and the pressures equalise.
Similarly, in case B, the air would be pushed out because the pressure on the inside of the container has somewhere to go.

Let's fit a regular pump, like a bike pump, to that hole. It pushes air away from itself, but it pushes it into the container. That would increase the pressure on the inside, resulting in case B.
Let's fit a vacuum pump instead. This pushes the air on the outside of the container away, because it has to prevent any more getting inside. At a basic level, this means that in the immediate area outside the hole, there is a lower pressure of air. So, just like case B, the molecules in the container expand, and push each other out that hole. There are less molecules inside the container as the pump runs (though it would take more force the more you try to get out).

Quote from: Aliveandkicking on August 28, 2016, 08:30:47 AM

Lets go thru it again.  An ordinary 'vacuum'pump works  by creating the best low pressure area it can do so inside the pump.    Your description however is only talking about pushing air away from the pump.    An ordinary pump also 'pushes air away from the pump'

Your description is also talking about the air molecules being connected which is not making any sense so far.

A vacuum pump works by creating a small container which is separated from the larger container.   How is the air connected if the pump creates a separate container which is hidden from the container by a set of valves?   

Is there a reducing number of molecules inside the container as the pump runs?

What exactly is passing out of the exhaust of the pump?

It might be easier to do this with a few examples. First, you were the one that mentioned molecules being connected together under this model: to my knowledge, that's basically because molecules are always touching other molecules, and there's no gap not filled by a molecule. That's all it is. It doesn't mean one area of air has to be touching every other area of air. Nature abhors a vacuum, so when the molecules have energy to they will expand to fill any empty space. Consider that a key axiom of the model.
Another key point is that according to Scepti 'pull' forces are impossible: everything's a push.

Let's suppose we have a simple airtight container, with a lower pressure of air than the outside in. There's no way in or out (in an ideal situation). There's more force on the outside of the container than the inside, but it can withstand it. This is case A.
If we flip it so there's a higher pressure on the air inside the container, then there's more force on the inside. This is case B.

Let's poke a hole in the container. Now, in case A, the higher pressure on the outside has something to do: it pushes its way in, so air flows inside, and the pressures equalise.
Similarly, in case B, the air would be pushed out because the pressure on the inside of the container has somewhere to go.

Let's fit a regular pump, like a bike pump, to that hole. It pushes air away from itself, but it pushes it into the container. That would increase the pressure on the inside, resulting in case B.
Let's fit a vacuum pump instead. This pushes the air on the outside of the container away, because it has to prevent any more getting inside. At a basic level, this means that in the immediate area outside the hole, there is a lower pressure of air. So, just like case B, the molecules in the container expand, and push each other out that hole. There are less molecules inside the container as the pump runs (though it would take more force the more you try to get out).

So the molecules are not connected they are just touching.  They can be separated.  Some molecules stay in the container and some are removed by the pump and go somewhere else on Earth.

You have again said a pump works by pushing on the air.   THE PUMP CANNOT WORK BY ONLY PUSHING ON THE AIR.   All you have to do is reverse the seal on a bicycle pump to cause air to flow into the bicycle pump.  Likewise you can take a one dollar syringe and put your finger over the end and pull on the handle to reduce the pressure and when you release the handle the handle shoots back inside to where it was before you pulled and created that low pressure.    Obviously nothing is pushing on the air to create the low pressure.  The same goes for a car engine which creates low pressure and enables the air and fuel to flow into the engine.   The same for a vacuum pump.

>>This pushes the air on the outside of the container away, because it has to prevent any more getting inside. At a basic level, this means that in the immediate area outside the hole , there is a lower pressure of air.

I totally have not one single clue what you are talking about.  Pushing on air cannot reduce pressure in a container.

Quote from: Aliveandkicking on August 28, 2016, 08:30:47 AM

Lets go thru it again.  An ordinary 'vacuum'pump works  by creating the best low pressure area it can do so inside the pump.    Your description however is only talking about pushing air away from the pump.    An ordinary pump also 'pushes air away from the pump'

Your description is also talking about the air molecules being connected which is not making any sense so far.

A vacuum pump works by creating a small container which is separated from the larger container.   How is the air connected if the pump creates a separate container which is hidden from the container by a set of valves?   

Is there a reducing number of molecules inside the container as the pump runs?

What exactly is passing out of the exhaust of the pump?

It might be easier to do this with a few examples. First, you were the one that mentioned molecules being connected together under this model: to my knowledge, that's basically because molecules are always touching other molecules, and there's no gap not filled by a molecule. That's all it is. It doesn't mean one area of air has to be touching every other area of air. Nature abhors a vacuum, so when the molecules have energy to they will expand to fill any empty space. Consider that a key axiom of the model.
Another key point is that according to Scepti 'pull' forces are impossible: everything's a push.

Let's suppose we have a simple airtight container, with a lower pressure of air than the outside in. There's no way in or out (in an ideal situation). There's more force on the outside of the container than the inside, but it can withstand it. This is case A.
If we flip it so there's a higher pressure on the air inside the container, then there's more force on the inside. This is case B.

Let's poke a hole in the container. Now, in case A, the higher pressure on the outside has something to do: it pushes its way in, so air flows inside, and the pressures equalise.
Similarly, in case B, the air would be pushed out because the pressure on the inside of the container has somewhere to go.

Let's fit a regular pump, like a bike pump, to that hole. It pushes air away from itself, but it pushes it into the container. That would increase the pressure on the inside, resulting in case B.
Let's fit a vacuum pump instead. This pushes the air on the outside of the container away, because it has to prevent any more getting inside. At a basic level, this means that in the immediate area outside the hole, there is a lower pressure of air. So, just like case B, the molecules in the container expand, and push each other out that hole. There are less molecules inside the container as the pump runs (though it would take more force the more you try to get out).

I have to commend you on a fantastic explanation.

Quote from: TheRealBillNye on August 27, 2016, 11:04:31 AM

If for some reason we cannot see this light source from where it originates, why not?

We are too far away to see it. We are down below in the orange squeezer and the sun is high up in the mound that you believe is the north pole.
This picture below is not an exact representation of my model but it shows a lot of what it would be like.

I don't understand. You said this map was an inaccurate representation of your model, but you didn't say which parts were irrelevant. It seems to me that if the sun were under the north pole in this map, the north pole should be the warmest place on earth. How far beneath the north pole is this arc light supposed to be?

Now look at any of the hundreds of other videos of people dropping objects inside of evacuation chambers, showing that they drop at the same rate. What is happening in these videos? Are all these videos elaborate con jobs as well?

Just so you don't need to ask this question again.
What is happening in those chambers are objects falling against much less resistance and able to fall at roughly <<< ROUGHLY the same speed according to your eye, even at slow motion speed.
[/quote]

OK so you agree that evacuation chambers have the ability to remove MOST of the air from a chamber.

Why do objects weigh the same inside of  evacuation chambers even after most of the air has been evacuated?

So the molecules are not connected they are just touching.  They can be separated.  Some molecules stay in the container and some are removed by the pump and go somewhere else on Earth.

You have again said a pump works by pushing on the air.   THE PUMP CANNOT WORK BY ONLY PUSHING ON THE AIR.   All you have to do is reverse the seal on a bicycle pump to cause air to flow into the bicycle pump.  Likewise you can take a one dollar syringe and put your finger over the end and pull on the handle to reduce the pressure and when you release the handle the handle shoots back inside to where it was before you pulled and created that low pressure.    Obviously nothing is pushing on the air to create the low pressure.  The same goes for a car engine which creates low pressure and enables the air and fuel to flow into the engine.   The same for a vacuum pump.

>>This pushes the air on the outside of the container away, because it has to prevent any more getting inside. At a basic level, this means that in the immediate area outside the hole , there is a lower pressure of air.

I totally have not one single clue what you are talking about.  Pushing on air cannot reduce pressure in a container.

You need to accept the axioms of the model first. That much should be obvious. Take your syringe case:
|  -------|
|  -------|

For an exceptionally poor diagram. Consider that the syringe at 'resting' rate, with the plunger all the way in. Equal pressure inside and outside, and we assume it's perfectly sealed (impractical in reality, but hey). We also treat this as one dimensional so I can explain what direction forces act in.
Now, pull the plunger out:

|      --------|
|      --------|

Red denotes higher, 'normal' pressure. The air that filled the smaller space in the first diagram has now expanded to fill the whole chamber inside the syringe, so it's at a much lower pressure.
What are the forces? Well, there's a force pushing the plunger to the right, because the outside's in contact with the air, and they'll push on everything. The force is notable, though, because it's not balanced: the force inside the chamber that pushes left, to keep the plunger out, is far lower than the pressure on the outside. So the moment you release the plunger, the air on the outside will push right, because it can: there's a direction to push, because of the lower concentration.

Release the plunger, you end up with the first diagram, where the forces acting on the plunger are equal.

It's much the same principle for the vacuum chamber:

(chamber) | (outside)

If you put a vacuum pump here at the boundary, simplistically put it pushes molecules to the right. This means there is no leftwards force acting on the molecules in the chamber to keep them compressed: so, by the previously stated axiom, the molecules seek to expand. They're always trying to expand: it takes the application of a force to compress them.
The lack of the leftwards force means molecules expand to the right. They push to the right, and so leave the chamber.

That's simplified, but hopefully it's clearer.

If you're more interested in thinking of it mathematically, this might help:
We create the container, poke a hole in the side, and the pressure of air inside and outside is equal.
So, the pressure exerted by the air inside the container (remembering that under this model only push forces exist) is an outwards force denoted F_c (for container).
The pressure exerted by the air outside the container is an inwards force we denote F_e (for everywhere).
If the pressures are balanced, clearly F_c = -F_e
Sum the two forces, you get zero: no change.

The presence of a vacuum pump, essentially means F_e shrinks to zero (or at least nearer to zero), so suddenly at that point of the container:
F_c > -F_e
So if these are the only two forces at play, the pushing force of F_c dominates, and you'd get net behaviour outwards.

Quote from: sceptimatic on August 28, 2016, 01:00:58 AM

Quote from: TheRealBillNye on August 27, 2016, 11:04:31 AM

If for some reason we cannot see this light source from where it originates, why not?

We are too far away to see it. We are down below in the orange squeezer and the sun is high up in the mound that you believe is the north pole.
This picture below is not an exact representation of my model but it shows a lot of what it would be like.

I don't understand. You said this map was an inaccurate representation of your model, but you didn't say which parts were irrelevant. It seems to me that if the sun were under the north pole in this map, the north pole should be the warmest place on earth. How far beneath the north pole is this arc light supposed to be?

Quote from: TheRealBillNye on August 27, 2016, 11:04:31 AM

Now look at any of the hundreds of other videos of people dropping objects inside of evacuation chambers, showing that they drop at the same rate. What is happening in these videos? Are all these videos elaborate con jobs as well?

Just so you don't need to ask this question again.
What is happening in those chambers are objects falling against much less resistance and able to fall at roughly <<< ROUGHLY the same speed according to your eye, even at slow motion speed.

OK so you agree that evacuation chambers have the ability to remove MOST of the air from a chamber.

Why do objects weigh the same inside of  evacuation chambers even after most of the air has been evacuated?

Expansion.

Someone put up a good video earlier of a man and child doing evacuation experiments with a balloon. It showed something interesting that proves denpressure. Can you guess what it is?

Quote from: TheRealBillNye on August 27, 2016, 06:39:20 PM

So we have all these jawbreakers peeling and unpeeling because of relative pressure?

How does the model explain the different elements?

If you look at any elements/objects and think about them, you can see that all they are, are sources of vibration at frequencies. They may look still and solid to you but they are all heat sources, except many you will never see by eye or even by technological aids for the eye.

If you think of EVERYTHING pushing together you can understand how structures/objects/elements, bond.

The key to understanding it is not to allow yourself to understand it without being side-tracked by what you think is the correct way, taught by mainstream.

You are now claiming that different elements are created by the differences in vibrating frequencies?

What is your basis for this kind of thinking? Where did you get this idea from?

It seems to me that particles vibrate depending upon their temperature. The more they vibrate, the more energy is exerted in the form of heat. Some particles vibrate so wildly that they change form, like going from a solid form (low vibration) to a gas (high vibration). You seem to be saying that you can change hydrogen to iron by simply increasing or decreasing the frequency of vibration.

Quote from: TheRealBillNye on August 27, 2016, 06:46:52 PM

Am I seriously the only one who is genuinely curious? I would personally like to know more about how the sun works in the denpressure model. Scepti claims it is like a movie projector, but when I go to the movies I can always tell where the image originates. If I look back, I can see where the light is coming from. Scepti seems to suggest the light comes from the center of the earth, but I have no idea how the light makes its way through the earth's crust to make its way to the upper atmosphere, to then be reflected back upon us.

It doesn't make its way through the Earth's crust. It's already open and high up.

You seem to be contradicting yourself. Is it in the center of the earth or isn't it?

Now you seem to be saying this arc light is in the open and high off the ground. We should certainly be able to see it.

It seems to me that particles vibrate depending upon their temperature. The more they vibrate, the more energy is exerted in the form of heat. Some particles vibrate so wildly that they change form, like going from a solid form (low vibration) to a gas (high vibration). You seem to be saying that you can change hydrogen to iron by simply increasing or decreasing the frequency of vibration.

If I'm right, the layers of balls in a jawbreaker would affect the frequency: you can introduce heat, but that'll increase how all of them vibrate, the overall relationship between the frequencies of each layer would stay intact. I imagine that's how it's meant to work, at least.

Related question, though (and apologies to Scepti for adding to flood of queries):
What is it that would define gas/liquid/solid with these molecules? If you add heat, molecules would vibrate faster, and try to expand. If you add high pressure, their expansion would be halted.
Which makes it seem as though, to me, gases are more expanded molecules, solids are more closely packed.
My query is related to gases: if they're molecules under a lot of heat, able to expand, wouldn't some layers unpeel? In which case, would some states of elements technically be different elements, if we define an element by the number of layers?

Expansion.

Someone put up a good video earlier of a man and child doing evacuation experiments with a balloon. It showed something interesting that proves denpressure. Can you guess what it is?

I would guess that the balloon would expand until it pops as the low air pressure would not be squeezing upon the exterior of the balloon at the same rate, allowing expansion.

This does not apply to scales, because scales are not airtight. The evacuation chamber takes out all the air in a chamber, unless said air is inside smaller airtight container.

What part of this proves denpressure?

You are now claiming that different elements are created by the differences in vibrating frequencies?

I've always claimed it. I just don't use it to explain everything because it scuppers arguments and people find it hard enough to grasp the basics.

What is your basis for this kind of thinking? Where did you get this idea from?

Just looking around you. Looking at how we all function and everything functions.

It seems to me that particles vibrate depending upon their temperature.

Actually it's the vibration that creates the temperatures. It's just another man made measurement of friction or vibration at different pressure frequencies.

The more they vibrate, the more energy is exerted in the form of heat.

Yep, that's we are and everything is. It's just heat due to agitation of molecules created due to expansion and compression which is what high and low pressures are noted for doing.

Some particles vibrate so wildly that they change form, like going from a solid form (low vibration) to a gas (high vibration). You seem to be saying that you can change hydrogen to iron by simply increasing or decreasing the frequency of vibration.

Yep and this is where your jaw breaker comes into it. The layers required to do that are all in there and are released depending on the force of vibration.

Quote from: Aliveandkicking on August 28, 2016, 10:33:57 AM

So the molecules are not connected they are just touching.  They can be separated.  Some molecules stay in the container and some are removed by the pump and go somewhere else on Earth.

You have again said a pump works by pushing on the air.   THE PUMP CANNOT WORK BY ONLY PUSHING ON THE AIR.   All you have to do is reverse the seal on a bicycle pump to cause air to flow into the bicycle pump.  Likewise you can take a one dollar syringe and put your finger over the end and pull on the handle to reduce the pressure and when you release the handle the handle shoots back inside to where it was before you pulled and created that low pressure.    Obviously nothing is pushing on the air to create the low pressure.  The same goes for a car engine which creates low pressure and enables the air and fuel to flow into the engine.   The same for a vacuum pump.

>>This pushes the air on the outside of the container away, because it has to prevent any more getting inside. At a basic level, this means that in the immediate area outside the hole , there is a lower pressure of air.

I totally have not one single clue what you are talking about.  Pushing on air cannot reduce pressure in a container.

You need to accept the axioms of the model first. That much should be obvious. Take your syringe case:
|  -------|
|  -------|

For an exceptionally poor diagram. Consider that the syringe at 'resting' rate, with the plunger all the way in. Equal pressure inside and outside, and we assume it's perfectly sealed (impractical in reality, but hey). We also treat this as one dimensional so I can explain what direction forces act in.
Now, pull the plunger out:

|      --------|
|      --------|

Red denotes higher, 'normal' pressure. The air that filled the smaller space in the first diagram has now expanded to fill the whole chamber inside the syringe, so it's at a much lower pressure.
What are the forces? Well, there's a force pushing the plunger to the right, because the outside's in contact with the air, and they'll push on everything. The force is notable, though, because it's not balanced: the force inside the chamber that pushes left, to keep the plunger out, is far lower than the pressure on the outside. So the moment you release the plunger, the air on the outside will push right, because it can: there's a direction to push, because of the lower concentration.

Release the plunger, you end up with the first diagram, where the forces acting on the plunger are equal.

It's much the same principle for the vacuum chamber:

(chamber) | (outside)

If you put a vacuum pump here at the boundary, simplistically put it pushes molecules to the right. This means there is no leftwards force acting on the molecules in the chamber to keep them compressed: so, by the previously stated axiom, the molecules seek to expand. They're always trying to expand: it takes the application of a force to compress them.
The lack of the leftwards force means molecules expand to the right. They push to the right, and so leave the chamber.

That's simplified, but hopefully it's clearer.

If you're more interested in thinking of it mathematically, this might help:
We create the container, poke a hole in the side, and the pressure of air inside and outside is equal.
So, the pressure exerted by the air inside the container (remembering that under this model only push forces exist) is an outwards force denoted F_c (for container).
The pressure exerted by the air outside the container is an inwards force we denote F_e (for everywhere).
If the pressures are balanced, clearly F_c = -F_e
Sum the two forces, you get zero: no change.

The presence of a vacuum pump, essentially means F_e shrinks to zero (or at least nearer to zero), so suddenly at that point of the container:
F_c > -F_e
So if these are the only two forces at play, the pushing force of F_c dominates, and you'd get net behaviour outwards.

You have described the first cycle of the pump only.    The boundary goes to the right and air is expelled,  The valves close but then the boundary goes to the left again and at this in point in time nothing has changed in the container.

But it does not matter.  Although you are leaving parts out it is the same process by which a pump works in my universe.   The pump works by expanding the volume of the container.

So to the rest of what you have said.

The molecules are not connected, they are touching.  They can be separated by the pump and some molecules can be left in the container and some can be spread around the World.

There is nothing in this model to stop a very low pressure from being created.    There is nothing in the model that says you cannot take out of the container another molecule.    The pump is easily able to separate the molecules.

Quote from: sceptimatic on August 28, 2016, 01:31:43 AM

Quote from: TheRealBillNye on August 27, 2016, 06:46:52 PM

Am I seriously the only one who is genuinely curious? I would personally like to know more about how the sun works in the denpressure model. Scepti claims it is like a movie projector, but when I go to the movies I can always tell where the image originates. If I look back, I can see where the light is coming from. Scepti seems to suggest the light comes from the center of the earth, but I have no idea how the light makes its way through the earth's crust to make its way to the upper atmosphere, to then be reflected back upon us.

It doesn't make its way through the Earth's crust. It's already open and high up.

You seem to be contradicting yourself. Is it in the center of the earth or isn't it?

Now you seem to be saying this arc light is in the open and high off the ground. We should certainly be able to see it.

When your mind is on a global Earth then your mind is on your north pole and mountains, I'm betting.

You think that you can look over yonder and there's a glowing sun sticking out of a mountain.
It's not so but you can see the effects of it. They're known as the northern lights.

Let me try and explain my mountain with the carbon arc inside.
You can climb a mountain using equipment to hook and crook your way up to certain heights.

My mountain ( if possible to walk to the summit) would be a gradient so mild that it appears almost as if you're walking a flat surface but as you progressed you would realise you were at a great height and yet still only scratching the gradient.

Condensed down to a manageable size, you have a kind of Earth like I showed earlier on in this topic.

Related question, though (and apologies to Scepti for adding to flood of queries):
What is it that would define gas/liquid/solid with these molecules? If you add heat, molecules would vibrate faster, and try to expand. If you add high pressure, their expansion would be halted.
Which makes it seem as though, to me, gases are more expanded molecules, solids are more closely packed.
My query is related to gases: if they're molecules under a lot of heat, able to expand, wouldn't some layers unpeel? In which case, would some states of elements technically be different elements, if we define an element by the number of layers?

Yes they would.

Quote from: TheRealBillNye on August 28, 2016, 11:06:48 AM

Quote from: sceptimatic on August 28, 2016, 01:31:43 AM

Quote from: TheRealBillNye on August 27, 2016, 06:46:52 PM

Am I seriously the only one who is genuinely curious? I would personally like to know more about how the sun works in the denpressure model. Scepti claims it is like a movie projector, but when I go to the movies I can always tell where the image originates. If I look back, I can see where the light is coming from. Scepti seems to suggest the light comes from the center of the earth, but I have no idea how the light makes its way through the earth's crust to make its way to the upper atmosphere, to then be reflected back upon us.

It doesn't make its way through the Earth's crust. It's already open and high up.

You seem to be contradicting yourself. Is it in the center of the earth or isn't it?

Now you seem to be saying this arc light is in the open and high off the ground. We should certainly be able to see it.

When your mind is on a global Earth then your mind is on your north pole and mountains, I'm betting.

You think that you can look over yonder and there's a glowing sun sticking out of a mountain.
It's not so but you can see the effects of it. They're known as the northern lights.

Let me try and explain my mountain with the carbon arc inside.
You can climb a mountain using equipment to hook and crook your way up to certain heights.

My mountain ( if possible to walk to the summit) would be a gradient so mild that it appears almost as if you're walking a flat surface but as you progressed you would realise you were at a great height and yet still only scratching the gradient.

Condensed down to a manageable size, you have a kind of Earth like I showed earlier on in this topic.

Mate you are either a very good troll or you are totally barking mad

Quote from: sceptimatic on August 28, 2016, 11:03:00 AM

Expansion.

Someone put up a good video earlier of a man and child doing evacuation experiments with a balloon. It showed something interesting that proves denpressure. Can you guess what it is?

I would guess that the balloon would expand until it pops as the low air pressure would not be squeezing upon the exterior of the balloon at the same rate, allowing expansion.

This does not apply to scales, because scales are not airtight. The evacuation chamber takes out all the air in a chamber, unless said air is inside smaller airtight container.

What part of this proves denpressure?

Can you remember the part in the video when the man sticks the balloon high up in the chamber so he didn't block the hole?
Did you notice how eventually the balloon covered the hole and stopped evacuation of pressure even when the balloon hadn't filled the chamber?

Have a good think as to why that happened and I'll give you some good insight if you don't manage to figure it out.

Quote from: TheRealBillNye on August 28, 2016, 11:04:17 AM

It seems to me that particles vibrate depending upon their temperature. The more they vibrate, the more energy is exerted in the form of heat. Some particles vibrate so wildly that they change form, like going from a solid form (low vibration) to a gas (high vibration). You seem to be saying that you can change hydrogen to iron by simply increasing or decreasing the frequency of vibration.

If I'm right, the layers of balls in a jawbreaker would affect the frequency: you can introduce heat, but that'll increase how all of them vibrate, the overall relationship between the frequencies of each layer would stay intact. I imagine that's how it's meant to work, at least.

Related question, though (and apologies to Scepti for adding to flood of queries):
What is it that would define gas/liquid/solid with these molecules? If you add heat, molecules would vibrate faster, and try to expand. If you add high pressure, their expansion would be halted.
Which makes it seem as though, to me, gases are more expanded molecules, solids are more closely packed.
My query is related to gases: if they're molecules under a lot of heat, able to expand, wouldn't some layers unpeel? In which case, would some states of elements technically be different elements, if we define an element by the number of layers?

What about when these layers peel off? What happens to those layers? Does this affect the vibrative relationship between layers?

Quote from: sceptimatic on August 28, 2016, 11:24:09 AM

Quote from: TheRealBillNye on August 28, 2016, 11:06:48 AM

Quote from: sceptimatic on August 28, 2016, 01:31:43 AM

Quote from: TheRealBillNye on August 27, 2016, 06:46:52 PM

Am I seriously the only one who is genuinely curious? I would personally like to know more about how the sun works in the denpressure model. Scepti claims it is like a movie projector, but when I go to the movies I can always tell where the image originates. If I look back, I can see where the light is coming from. Scepti seems to suggest the light comes from the center of the earth, but I have no idea how the light makes its way through the earth's crust to make its way to the upper atmosphere, to then be reflected back upon us.

It doesn't make its way through the Earth's crust. It's already open and high up.

You seem to be contradicting yourself. Is it in the center of the earth or isn't it?

Now you seem to be saying this arc light is in the open and high off the ground. We should certainly be able to see it.

When your mind is on a global Earth then your mind is on your north pole and mountains, I'm betting.

You think that you can look over yonder and there's a glowing sun sticking out of a mountain.
It's not so but you can see the effects of it. They're known as the northern lights.

Let me try and explain my mountain with the carbon arc inside.
You can climb a mountain using equipment to hook and crook your way up to certain heights.

My mountain ( if possible to walk to the summit) would be a gradient so mild that it appears almost as if you're walking a flat surface but as you progressed you would realise you were at a great height and yet still only scratching the gradient.

Condensed down to a manageable size, you have a kind of Earth like I showed earlier on in this topic.

Mate you are either a very good troll or you are totally barking mad

And yet you're fine looking up at the sky and thinking a great big ball of fire that is 850,000 miles in diameter that sits at 93 million miles out into a vacuum and somehow warms you up.

Who's barking mad?

Quote from: Jane on August 28, 2016, 11:11:31 AM

Quote from: TheRealBillNye on August 28, 2016, 11:04:17 AM

It seems to me that particles vibrate depending upon their temperature. The more they vibrate, the more energy is exerted in the form of heat. Some particles vibrate so wildly that they change form, like going from a solid form (low vibration) to a gas (high vibration). You seem to be saying that you can change hydrogen to iron by simply increasing or decreasing the frequency of vibration.

If I'm right, the layers of balls in a jawbreaker would affect the frequency: you can introduce heat, but that'll increase how all of them vibrate, the overall relationship between the frequencies of each layer would stay intact. I imagine that's how it's meant to work, at least.

Related question, though (and apologies to Scepti for adding to flood of queries):
What is it that would define gas/liquid/solid with these molecules? If you add heat, molecules would vibrate faster, and try to expand. If you add high pressure, their expansion would be halted.
Which makes it seem as though, to me, gases are more expanded molecules, solids are more closely packed.
My query is related to gases: if they're molecules under a lot of heat, able to expand, wouldn't some layers unpeel? In which case, would some states of elements technically be different elements, if we define an element by the number of layers?

What about when these layers peel off? What happens to those layers? Does this affect the vibrative relationship between layers?

Of course it does.

Pardon me stirring up a slight derail. 

Let me try and explain my mountain with the carbon arc inside.
You can climb a mountain using equipment to hook and crook your way up to certain heights.

My mountain ( if possible to walk to the summit) would be a gradient so mild that it appears almost as if you're walking a flat surface but as you progressed you would realise you were at a great height and yet still only scratching the gradient.

Does this imply that the true form of the arctic circle is much bigger or expanded out than we are commonly led to believe? 

Quote from: TheRealBillNye on August 28, 2016, 11:13:12 AM

Quote from: sceptimatic on August 28, 2016, 11:03:00 AM

Expansion.

Someone put up a good video earlier of a man and child doing evacuation experiments with a balloon. It showed something interesting that proves denpressure. Can you guess what it is?

I would guess that the balloon would expand until it pops as the low air pressure would not be squeezing upon the exterior of the balloon at the same rate, allowing expansion.

This does not apply to scales, because scales are not airtight. The evacuation chamber takes out all the air in a chamber, unless said air is inside smaller airtight container.

What part of this proves denpressure?

Can you remember the part in the video when the man sticks the balloon high up in the chamber so he didn't block the hole?
Did you notice how eventually the balloon covered the hole and stopped evacuation of pressure even when the balloon hadn't filled the chamber?

Have a good think as to why that happened and I'll give you some good insight if you don't manage to figure it out.

Like all the other air particles in the chamber, the balloon was drawn toward the pump. Think of a bathtub full of water and a rubber ducky on top. If you drain the tub, all the water (and the duck) starts moving toward the drain.

Still don't see how this proves denpressure. Maybe you would like to elaborate?

Quote from: sceptimatic on August 28, 2016, 03:05:23 AM

Quote from: Master_Evar on August 28, 2016, 02:56:01 AM

Also, I would be very very pleased if you could use proper names for all of your different components of your model, instead of saying things like "molecules/atoms/matter or whatever name is or wants to be used about them". Because I get a bit confused as to exactly what you are talking about sometimes.

But otherwise I think I get it. So, we live in this "cell" that made up of lots of bits of matter (It would be nice if you would give this piece of matter some name. Don't name it an atom or molecule, it would be confusing). All the matter is connected, so there can't be any vacuum between them. And if two pieces of matter are pushed together really hard, one of them swallows the other and they form a "jawbreaker" (once again, a proper name would be nice), which changes how that piece of two bits of matter behaves (we get a new element/material).

Basically you're starting to get the gist of it. Just nibble away at it and feel free to add names to whatever is confusing you.

But, don't you have names for these things? If you want people to understand your model, it's usually good to name things, so people know what you are talking about, and to make it easier than saying "expanding and retracting pieces of matter" or so that people don't think of the candy when you say "jawbreaker".

But okay. So, the next question: what are solids, what are liquids, what are gases, and what is plasma? As in, how does the matter behaves in a solid, how does it behave in a liquid, etc.?

@sceptimatic?

Pardon me stirring up a slight derail. 

Quote from: sceptimatic on August 28, 2016, 11:24:09 AM

Let me try and explain my mountain with the carbon arc inside.
You can climb a mountain using equipment to hook and crook your way up to certain heights.

My mountain ( if possible to walk to the summit) would be a gradient so mild that it appears almost as if you're walking a flat surface but as you progressed you would realise you were at a great height and yet still only scratching the gradient.

Does this imply that the true form of the arctic circle is much bigger or expanded out than we are commonly led to believe?

Absolutely.