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

Quote from: sceptimatic on December 08, 2018, 11:36:32 PM

Quote from: Stash on December 08, 2018, 09:43:12 PM

Quote from: sceptimatic on December 07, 2018, 04:38:11 AM

Quote from: Stash

Also, a lot lately in this thread is kind of around how den pressure works as, let's say, a replacement for gravity on a flat earth, simply as that. But after reading Jane's compendium on the subject, there's a whole lot more that is required: The dome, the way the sun heats and cools it due to proximity and causes it to breathe, the heat source at the north pole and crystal that projects the stars, seemingly all of which play into the hypothesis. Can den pressure stand on it's own without these other aspects, or are they necessary for understanding it by taking them into account? If the latter, I can see why this is 75 pages.

It can stand on its own and as part of it all.
The major issue is to get the basics in so people understand the extreme simplicity first that leads to what we perceive around us.

Just so I understand, a seemingly super basic question, but am not sure based upon your answer. Den pressure requires a domed flat earth and it wouldn't work on a globe earth?

Denpressure absolutely 1 trillion % and then some...will never work on  a global earth like the one we're coaxed into believing.

We know the earth is a globe from measured distances, satellite angles, angle of the sun. All easily proven.

Quote from: Stash on December 08, 2018, 09:43:12 PM

Quote from: sceptimatic on December 07, 2018, 04:38:11 AM

Quote from: Stash

Also, a lot lately in this thread is kind of around how den pressure works as, let's say, a replacement for gravity on a flat earth, simply as that. But after reading Jane's compendium on the subject, there's a whole lot more that is required: The dome, the way the sun heats and cools it due to proximity and causes it to breathe, the heat source at the north pole and crystal that projects the stars, seemingly all of which play into the hypothesis. Can den pressure stand on it's own without these other aspects, or are they necessary for understanding it by taking them into account? If the latter, I can see why this is 75 pages.

It can stand on its own and as part of it all.
The major issue is to get the basics in so people understand the extreme simplicity first that leads to what we perceive around us.

Just so I understand, a seemingly super basic question, but am not sure based upon your answer. Den pressure requires a domed flat earth and it wouldn't work on a globe earth?

Denpressure absolutely 1 trillion % and then some...will never work on  a global earth like the one we're coaxed into believing.

Quote from: inquisitive on December 08, 2018, 11:51:06 PM

Quote from: sceptimatic on December 08, 2018, 11:36:32 PM

Quote from: Stash on December 08, 2018, 09:43:12 PM

Quote from: sceptimatic on December 07, 2018, 04:38:11 AM

Quote from: Stash

Also, a lot lately in this thread is kind of around how den pressure works as, let's say, a replacement for gravity on a flat earth, simply as that. But after reading Jane's compendium on the subject, there's a whole lot more that is required: The dome, the way the sun heats and cools it due to proximity and causes it to breathe, the heat source at the north pole and crystal that projects the stars, seemingly all of which play into the hypothesis. Can den pressure stand on it's own without these other aspects, or are they necessary for understanding it by taking them into account? If the latter, I can see why this is 75 pages.

It can stand on its own and as part of it all.
The major issue is to get the basics in so people understand the extreme simplicity first that leads to what we perceive around us.

Just so I understand, a seemingly super basic question, but am not sure based upon your answer. Den pressure requires a domed flat earth and it wouldn't work on a globe earth?

Denpressure absolutely 1 trillion % and then some...will never work on  a global earth like the one we're coaxed into believing.

We know the earth is a globe from measured distances, satellite angles, angle of the sun. All easily proven.

Good for you, you stick to that and I'll stick to my stuff.

Quote from: sceptimatic on December 08, 2018, 11:36:32 PM

Quote from: Stash on December 08, 2018, 09:43:12 PM

Quote from: sceptimatic on December 07, 2018, 04:38:11 AM

Quote from: Stash

Also, a lot lately in this thread is kind of around how den pressure works as, let's say, a replacement for gravity on a flat earth, simply as that. But after reading Jane's compendium on the subject, there's a whole lot more that is required: The dome, the way the sun heats and cools it due to proximity and causes it to breathe, the heat source at the north pole and crystal that projects the stars, seemingly all of which play into the hypothesis. Can den pressure stand on it's own without these other aspects, or are they necessary for understanding it by taking them into account? If the latter, I can see why this is 75 pages.

It can stand on its own and as part of it all.
The major issue is to get the basics in so people understand the extreme simplicity first that leads to what we perceive around us.

Just so I understand, a seemingly super basic question, but am not sure based upon your answer. Den pressure requires a domed flat earth and it wouldn't work on a globe earth?

Denpressure absolutely 1 trillion % and then some...will never work on  a global earth like the one we're coaxed into believing.

That doesn't answer the question completely. I'll ask it another way, does den pressure require a dome?

Quote from: Stash on December 09, 2018, 12:09:35 AM

Quote from: sceptimatic on December 08, 2018, 11:36:32 PM

Quote from: Stash on December 08, 2018, 09:43:12 PM

Quote from: sceptimatic on December 07, 2018, 04:38:11 AM

Quote from: Stash

Also, a lot lately in this thread is kind of around how den pressure works as, let's say, a replacement for gravity on a flat earth, simply as that. But after reading Jane's compendium on the subject, there's a whole lot more that is required: The dome, the way the sun heats and cools it due to proximity and causes it to breathe, the heat source at the north pole and crystal that projects the stars, seemingly all of which play into the hypothesis. Can den pressure stand on it's own without these other aspects, or are they necessary for understanding it by taking them into account? If the latter, I can see why this is 75 pages.

It can stand on its own and as part of it all.
The major issue is to get the basics in so people understand the extreme simplicity first that leads to what we perceive around us.

Just so I understand, a seemingly super basic question, but am not sure based upon your answer. Den pressure requires a domed flat earth and it wouldn't work on a globe earth?

Denpressure absolutely 1 trillion % and then some...will never work on  a global earth like the one we're coaxed into believing.

That doesn't answer the question completely. I'll ask it another way, does den pressure require a dome?

Absolutely.
The dome is natural by stack. It doesn't just appear for atmosphere, it is the end tack of the build up of atmosphere which creates the atmospheric pressure around us all and every other object pushing into it.
This is why the dome is helium ice and other elements that build up to it that are broken into their parts by expansion from bottom to top.

It has to have a foundation and the Earth provides it as a solid at the edges, creating the  necessary sloped build  alla round as the major foundation for the actual dome we see reflections off of...not into.

However, this requires much more explanation and will literally skew understanding of denpressure if it's allowed to go too far down that rabbit hole.

Balloons expand because of the pressure differential between outside and inside. This is a force on the wall acting against the elastic properties of the rubber trying to pull it back to it's nominal shape.  If you were inside the balloon you would not be "pinned to the edge".  The air would just flow around you as it equalizes.  The force only applies to the wall because it's an continuous barrier that prevents the air going anywhere else.  Try inflating a balloon with a hole in it and see how far you get.

I'm not sure why you are just accepting that this hypothesis does what it claims to do?

No, no, I think it provides a crucial element. Yes, it does serve up other rabbit holes, but if necessary, should be included. It shouldn't skew Den pressure because it's a vital component of the hypothesis. Without it, den pressure doesn't work. Unfortunately for you, that means you have to defend dome theory too, but so be it. It's part and parcel to Den pressure, but hopefully all can discuss as a package.

Quote from: Stash on December 09, 2018, 02:06:05 AM

No, no, I think it provides a crucial element. Yes, it does serve up other rabbit holes, but if necessary, should be included. It shouldn't skew Den pressure because it's a vital component of the hypothesis. Without it, den pressure doesn't work. Unfortunately for you, that means you have to defend dome theory too, but so be it. It's part and parcel to Den pressure, but hopefully all can discuss as a package.

How about you understand and concede one topic before gish galloping over to another?

Quote from: MicroBeta on December 08, 2018, 10:47:05 AM

Why won't you answer my question, which came first, but demand I answer yours?

Because you're trying to skew the basics which was my intention and here I am having to deal with Cavendish and so called gravity.

If you call it "Cavendish and so-called gravity" how do you explain the 61 sets of measurements (on the left) from 1798 to 2000 that give close to the currently accepted value. Even the very first, by Henry Cavendish himself,       gave the value of G = 6.74 x 10-11 m3 kg-1 s-2       compared to the ‎CODATA Value of G = 6.674 x 10-11 m3 kg-1 s-2. Not too bad for 220 years ago. So, if the result of Henry Cavendish's experiment was just "due to a gust of air" how is it that all the others are so close? Can you show any denpressure experiments that gave comparable accuracy results?

Quote from: Themightykabool on December 07, 2018, 05:20:13 PM

Quote from: defender_of_truth on December 07, 2018, 03:26:35 PM

You said a whole lot that goes into your explanations of why you think things happen they way they happen, but I want to exclude that from the discussion for the time being.

Question: does 1cm cube of steel weigh more in air or at the bottom of a pool?

He says the steel is porous and contains air itself.
Which we know by chemical reactions to be false.
Theres a whole science behind metalurgy.

It doesn't take much thought to understand that it is actually porous and so is just about everything solid.

It's also about trapped atmosphere.

Quote from: Unconvinced on December 08, 2018, 06:48:50 PM

Balloons expand because of the pressure differential between outside and inside. This is a force on the wall acting against the elastic properties of the rubber trying to pull it back to it's nominal shape.  If you were inside the balloon you would not be "pinned to the edge".  The air would just flow around you as it equalizes.  The force only applies to the wall because it's an continuous barrier that prevents the air going anywhere else.  Try inflating a balloon with a hole in it and see how far you get.

So, the force applies to the wall but magically avoids the thing right next to the wall? Sure, high pressure heads towards low, inflate a balloon with a hole and it's all going to be rushing towards that hole, but without that there is still a force acting on you. It'd be a bit more than just the wind going by you given that it's demonstrably stronger, like you pointed out that's the whole reason a balloon inflates.

Once you've tied it off and stopped inflating, sure, then it's just air going around and nothing would keep you pinned, but there is an active, constant force on you during the process of inflation and I genuinely cannot see how anyone could deny that with a straight face.

Seriously. Stop arguing for the sake of arguing.

Quote

No ons arguing for the sake of aruing except you.
Denpressure sits alone with only you and scept as champions.
We can deny it with a straight face because it is wrong on so many levels.

Scepti recently stated two things regarding his super simple theory.
1.  Explaining denP would require confusing denp and take us further down his fantasy of a rabbit hole.

2.  We are pressed tot eh "foundation" because aur presses or stacks or expands or whtever in alldirections.
And There is a dome!
So lets combine these two thoughts.
At some point in the middle of our balloon bubble, we will get pushed or energized or forced or whatever he calls it to the edge or foundation or boundary or helium ice.
So at some point an airplane would accellerate OUT despite other FErs stating the magnetic north pulls us IN to the center.

Actually 3 things.
I think scept denounced that things fall at 9.81.
Forget 1 and 2.
Admit or refute things fall at 9.81

Quote from: Unconvinced on December 08, 2018, 06:48:50 PM

Balloons expand because of the pressure differential between outside and inside. This is a force on the wall acting against the elastic properties of the rubber trying to pull it back to it's nominal shape.  If you were inside the balloon you would not be "pinned to the edge".  The air would just flow around you as it equalizes.  The force only applies to the wall because it's an continuous barrier that prevents the air going anywhere else.  Try inflating a balloon with a hole in it and see how far you get.

So, the force applies to the wall but magically avoids the thing right next to the wall? Sure, high pressure heads towards low, inflate a balloon with a hole and it's all going to be rushing towards that hole, but without that there is still a force acting on you. It'd be a bit more than just the wind going by you given that it's demonstrably stronger, like you pointed out that's the whole reason a balloon inflates.

Once you've tied it off and stopped inflating, sure, then it's just air going around and nothing would keep you pinned, but there is an active, constant force on you during the process of inflation and I genuinely cannot see how anyone could deny that with a straight face.

Seriously. Stop arguing for the sake of arguing.

Quote

I'm not sure why you are just accepting that this hypothesis does what it claims to do?

I don't accept it, I'm just trying to get people to argue against what it actually is. It can answer some questions, yes, denying that does nothing but make REers come across as needing to lie.

Looks like i fail at forum'ing

Quote from: inquisitive on December 08, 2018, 10:40:38 AM

Quote from: sceptimatic on December 08, 2018, 10:32:36 AM

Quote from: inquisitive on December 08, 2018, 08:33:46 AM

Measure the time it takes an object to fall 1m. Do you agree a piece of lead and one of copper will fall at the same speed?

From 1 metre, most likely. That proves nothing about gravity.

If I change the shape of one and drop them from a height, one will fall faster than the other.
What happens then?
It gets called out as air resistance.

The it comes down to the nonsense of big so called vacuum chambers and the dropping of objects as some kind of proof. It's complete nonsense.

Do you agree that the acceleration varies at different places slightly and is not related to armospheric pressure?

No, not at all.

Why do you think balloons expand when you inflate them? It's not because the force is balanced in all directions, because it could be going in any direction, it's because there is excessive force against the edges. If you are against that edge, you will be pinned to that edge. You're 'pressed in one direction' because the force isn't at equilibrium, you have to be pressed somewhere, and that's obvious going to be an edge. If you start off against the metal surface, are you seriously going to tell me the force wouldn't pin you to it?

Quote from: Jane on December 07, 2018, 01:06:48 PM

Why do you think balloons expand when you inflate them? It's not because the force is balanced in all directions, because it could be going in any direction, it's because there is excessive force against the edges. If you are against that edge, you will be pinned to that edge. You're 'pressed in one direction' because the force isn't at equilibrium, you have to be pressed somewhere, and that's obvious going to be an edge. If you start off against the metal surface, are you seriously going to tell me the force wouldn't pin you to it?

No, this is completely wrong. 

As the 'Circus Big Top in Space' fills with gas it will diffuse and air pressure will be equal (give or take) throughout.  Nothing will pin you anywhere. 

A scientifically educated person like yourself coming out with this stuff just makes me think laughing behind your hand at us as we even bother to engage with such obvious nonsense.

The dome is required for Den pressure to exist. How is that "overwhelming an opponent with as many arguments as possible, without regard for accuracy or strength of the arguments." (Yeah, I had to look up gish galloping)

Not magically.  You’re sounding more like a real flat earther all the time.  The balloon inflates because of the difference in pressure between outside and inside.  Inside, this pressure difference is not present, so an object inside will not experience this force. 

I didn’t say you believed in Den Pressure, but you have been arguing that it should work on its own terms as a possible gravity replacement.

Quote from: Jane on December 07, 2018, 01:06:48 PM

Why do you think balloons expand when you inflate them? It's not because the force is balanced in all directions, because it could be going in any direction, it's because there is excessive force against the edges. If you are against that edge, you will be pinned to that edge. You're 'pressed in one direction' because the force isn't at equilibrium, you have to be pressed somewhere, and that's obvious going to be an edge. If you start off against the metal surface, are you seriously going to tell me the force wouldn't pin you to it?

No, this is completely wrong. 

As the 'Circus Big Top in Space' fills with gas it will diffuse and air pressure will be equal (give or take) throughout.  Nothing will pin you anywhere. 

A scientifically educated person like yourself coming out with this stuff just makes me think laughing behind your hand at us as we even bother to engage with such obvious nonsense.

I think the only reason Jane defends these theories is because she researched and wrote topics on them.  If the theory is completely obliterated and defeat is accepted, all the work she has done would have been a colossal waste of time.

Do you see my problem?

If you are inside a chamber while it is being inflated, you aren't going to remain perfectly stationary with air in balance all around you. If you seriously think that I don't know what I could possibly say to explain anything to you.

Or better yet, take me through the physics of how one would be "pinned" to floor whilst the big top is inflating.  All you keep doing is saying "surely you must see it" whilst waving your hands around and offering no explanation whatsoever.

Quote from: Unconvinced on December 09, 2018, 05:12:48 AM

Not magically.  You’re sounding more like a real flat earther all the time.  The balloon inflates because of the difference in pressure between outside and inside.  Inside, this pressure difference is not present, so an object inside will not experience this force. 

What you are saying fundamentally does not make sense. The outside of a balloon cannot inflate if the inside is not also inflating, and you can't have it growing in size (ie: moving outwards, or accelerating as they were once stationary) without a force. You just can't. We aren't talking about static moments here, we are talking about what happens during the process of inflation and, yes, it's because of a difference in pressure (which easily translates to denpressure) but there is still a force. The time it takes doesn't matter, though obviously the force is greater if you do it faster. Puncture a balloon filled to bursting point and it's much more violent than one that's barely started expanding.

Though it's worth pointing out a balloon isn't where this started. A balloon only got brought up because of a denial of an even more basic principle, the actual chamber in question was a metal disc with rubber stretched over the top. In a regular balloon, thanks to the shape of it, things'd only get pinned to the point opposite the inflation. That chamber has a whole surface for things to push against.

Quote

I didn’t say you believed in Den Pressure, but you have been arguing that it should work on its own terms as a possible gravity replacement.

No. I'm saying you shouldn't argue against the aspects of it that do make sense just because a FEer said them. When you mix in good arguments with bad, you ruin your own credibility for those that disagree with you, and misinform those that do agree on underlying physics.

An object on the inside does not have this pressure differential.  There will be temporary pressure differences as air is pumped in, but it will flow around the object. 

Quote from: Stash on December 09, 2018, 03:01:12 AM

The dome is required for Den pressure to exist. How is that "overwhelming an opponent with as many arguments as possible, without regard for accuracy or strength of the arguments." (Yeah, I had to look up gish galloping)

Because it's focusing on a different aspect. Yes, denpressure needs a dome, but if you leap to the intricacies of that before you understand how the rest of it works than you're just making it certain you're going to go back to the first topic when you remember less of it and ask the same questions all over.

Do you see my problem? You have to actively ignore what I say in order to defend your position. Yes, it will diffuse, the air pressure will be equal throughout, but we aren't at that stage yet. I explicitly pointed that out. I'm not laughing, I'm banging my head on the wall.

If you are inside a chamber while it is being inflated, you aren't going to remain perfectly stationary with air in balance all around you. If you seriously think that I don't know what I could possibly say to explain anything to you.

How is it a leap into the 'intricacies'? Den pressure only works inside a dome. Umm, kind of crucial, intrinsic, not a "different aspect." It's like a guy asking the man with a broken leg, "How do you walk?"

Because it's focusing on a different aspect. Yes, denpressure needs a dome, but if you leap to the intricacies of that before you understand how the rest of it works than you're just making it certain you're going to go back to the first topic when you remember less of it and ask the same questions all over.

He still has nothing to cause a downward force so still needs gravitation.

Quote from: Unconvinced on December 09, 2018, 11:45:35 AM

An object on the inside does not have this pressure differential.  There will be temporary pressure differences as air is pumped in, but it will flow around the object. 

Temporary is all that matters, I'm just talking about a moment to demonstrate the principle.
It's not going to flow around an object and never touch it or affect it.

As I said from the beginning an object inside would be affected by the flow of air from higher to lower pressure. 

Is that anything like the force that keep us on the ground, though?

I’d have thought someone would have noticed the enormous gale of wind pushing us down.  It probably wouldn’t help air travel either.

Denpressure has direction. There is something special about the Earth as an edge to the dome.

Quote from: Jane on December 09, 2018, 01:31:40 PM

Denpressure has direction. There is something special about the Earth as an edge to the dome.

This is what I'm talking about with the dome being intrinsic. Now we have this. How does den pressure have "direction"? Is this the "foundation" thing that's been mentioned? And what is "special" about the earth? Is there yet another "different aspect" that's required for den pressure to work that hasn't been brought up?