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

Scepti must be conspiring against himself also, since he could verify both cavendish and acceleration tests in a low pressure chamber yet chooses not to.

After two years and 82pg, we should get the subject heading changed to:

Denpressure, a somewhat definable using redefined words but boils down to conspiracy.

Quote from: Themightykabool on December 11, 2018, 01:01:40 PM

Dafuq?
The chamber is 37m high.
Whats your question?

Firstly 37 metres is not high in terms of dropping something to gauge a guaranteed 9.8ms/s fall and also there's no way that is a vacuum chamber as we are told.
Also nobody is timing any fall. They are pretending a feather and bowling ball fall at the same rate in that nonsense of a vacuum chamber.

I also asked for physical proof.
Were you there?

What time do you think an object would take to fall 37m ignoring air resistance?

What is, to you, physical proof?

Scepti must be conspiring against himself also, since he could verify both cavendish and acceleration tests in a low pressure chamber yet chooses not to.

He does make a million dollars a day. You would think he would run an experiment.

Quote from: Unconvinced on December 12, 2018, 12:10:08 AM

Quote from: sceptimatic on December 11, 2018, 12:59:11 PM

It's how and why high pressure air flows is the key.

How about you tell me why it flows in your mind. Then I'll tell you how it happens in mine.

Why do you need to know what I think?  I’m not the one proposing something different from standard models.

Why even bother getting into a debate then.
I'll overlook you.

I thought the debate was on Den Pressure?

I’m happy to talk about that and compare with regular fluid mechanics.  But I don’t have my own version of how air pressure should work.  Just the text book version.  What I don’t know, I look up as needed.

If the aim is to test me on the subject, that seems a bit pointless really.

After two years and 82pg,

Oh, there are several other mega-threads out there, some bigger than this.

The original ones aren't much use however, as scepti deleted all his posts from them.  Making them somewhat confusing.

Quote from: sceptimatic on December 11, 2018, 01:00:10 PM

Quote from: inquisitive on December 11, 2018, 12:28:46 PM

Quote from: sceptimatic on December 11, 2018, 11:44:45 AM

Quote from: Themightykabool on December 11, 2018, 11:37:02 AM

As mentioned before.
Look it up.
Welcome to the internet.
Theres this thing called youtube.

I'll put this to you once again and highlight it.

Ok then, tell me about this 9.81 m/s/s over distance and how you know by truth and physical fact it's been measured for anything over distance in a fall.

Are you just trying to score points or are you interested in a sensible discussion?

We know because of proven and published data. Plus the ability to do experiments at school which you must have done.  Why don't you do some tests from 1m, 2m and 3m.

It's like me asking you how do you know how long 1m is.

You're not very convincing. You're struggling for an answer.

I guess you've decided ignore my question about why masses would attract in the Cavendish experiment due to denpressure producing consistent and predictable results every time it's run.

Mike

Let's not argue about mass attracting mass because it just becomes silly.

If I place a small pin head sized ball bearing next to a house sized steel ball there is no attraction unless you wait around until the circulating atmosphere manages to shift the small bearing.
The Cavendish experiment is a load of old cobblers for predicting an unknown force supposedly called gravity.

People really need to question it but I accept many won't.

Moke your question is over complicated.
Scepti has just admitted everyones in conspiracy against him.
There you have it!!!
Ill pull a danang and claim "case closed".

Keep it closed.

Quote from: sceptimatic on December 12, 2018, 01:14:27 AM

Quote from: Themightykabool on December 11, 2018, 01:01:40 PM

Dafuq?
The chamber is 37m high.
Whats your question?

Firstly 37 metres is not high in terms of dropping something to gauge a guaranteed 9.8ms/s fall and also there's no way that is a vacuum chamber as we are told.
Also nobody is timing any fall. They are pretending a feather and bowling ball fall at the same rate in that nonsense of a vacuum chamber.

I also asked for physical proof.
Were you there?

What time do you think an object would take to fall 37m ignoring air resistance?

What is, to you, physical proof?

You can't ignore air resistance, that's the issue.
This is why the 9.81 is nonsense as a constant in a so called vacuum.

I thought the debate was on Den Pressure?

I’m happy to talk about that and compare with regular fluid mechanics.  But I don’t have my own version of how air pressure should work.  Just the text book version.  What I don’t know, I look up as needed.

If the aim is to test me on the subject, that seems a bit pointless really.

If you want to understand denpressure then you have to place your books aside for the time being, in terms of using them as an argument against it.

Once you get a grip on the basics it all ties in right to the end of how Earth works....sort of...but even my hypothesis requires lots more explanation.

However, the basics is where it needs to start and not skewed like it does, time and time and time again.
Most people have no clue how an evacuation  chamber works except for what they're told. And yet literal logic and thought can get a grasp of it.
Once that basic thing is grasped, more things can easily be grasped and it makes a lot more sense in terms of learning denpressure.

Somehow people feel too comfortable citing mainstream indoctrinated ready meal so called science which is nothing more than pseudo science and basically, lies...especially with the stuff that is impossible to verify.

The fact that people think random particles of matter just float about in space in between a vacuum of nothingness, beggars belief but there it is.
The fact that people think Matter just randomly bounces about in between free space on Earth shows me that people are willing to accept anything as long as it's handed to them on  some kind of official plate.

All I'm asking people to do, is to question it. I'm not asking for anyone to change their stance on their belief's. I'm not asking anyone to support denpressure.
If people are interested in opening their minds to many a thought process and experiment then they might surprise themselves.

The thing is, I'm not into arguing about a global Earth whilst trying to explain my side. I'm more than happy to see people grasp the basics  before they move on with my hypothesis but those who start to change it up to try and scupper people trying to get to the basics will be overlooked from now on, even if the topic shuts down for a year.

Quote from: inquisitive on December 12, 2018, 06:40:19 AM

Quote from: sceptimatic on December 12, 2018, 01:14:27 AM

Quote from: Themightykabool on December 11, 2018, 01:01:40 PM

Dafuq?
The chamber is 37m high.
Whats your question?

Firstly 37 metres is not high in terms of dropping something to gauge a guaranteed 9.8ms/s fall and also there's no way that is a vacuum chamber as we are told.
Also nobody is timing any fall. They are pretending a feather and bowling ball fall at the same rate in that nonsense of a vacuum chamber.

I also asked for physical proof.
Were you there?

What time do you think an object would take to fall 37m ignoring air resistance?

What is, to you, physical proof?

You can't ignore air resistance, that's the issue.
This is why the 9.81 is nonsense as a constant in a so called vacuum.

Why do the measurements we do come up with ~9.81?  What do your tests show?

Quote from: MicroBeta on December 12, 2018, 01:52:42 AM

I guess you've decided ignore my question about why masses would attract in the Cavendish experiment due to denpressure producing consistent and predictable results every time it's run.

Mike

Let's not argue about mass attracting mass because it just becomes silly.

If I place a small pin head sized ball bearing next to a house sized steel ball there is no attraction unless you wait around until the circulating atmosphere manages to shift the small bearing.
The Cavendish experiment is a load of old cobblers for predicting an unknown force supposedly called gravity.

People really need to question it but I accept many won't.

There is no need for me to question because I did this experiment in high school.  You may "question" it but unless you've actually done the experiment you don't have a leg to stand on. 

If it merely due to random air currents in the circulating atmosphere then...

- How do you explain the fact that everyone who does this experiment gets the gravitational constant to a value within 1-ish %?

- How do you explain the fact that everyone who does this experiment can calculate what the results will be if they vary the masses placed near the torsional balance?

- How do you explain the fact that everyone who does this experiment gets consistent and predictable results time after time?

All of this would be impossible if it were due to random air circulation and your comment is nothing but a cop out.

You can’t escape the consistent and predictable results.  If you’re going to stick with denpressure then you really need an explanation for reality and quit with the cop out comments.  Whether it's gravity or some other force it is verifiable fact...not matter what unsupportable hand waving you come up with to try to explain it away.  Instead of just making up what ever crap you need to in order to ensure the results fit you narrative, how about you actually try to make your narrative fit reality? 

Mike

Quote from: inquisitive on December 12, 2018, 06:40:19 AM

Quote from: sceptimatic on December 12, 2018, 01:14:27 AM

Quote from: Themightykabool on December 11, 2018, 01:01:40 PM

Dafuq?
The chamber is 37m high.
Whats your question?

Firstly 37 metres is not high in terms of dropping something to gauge a guaranteed 9.8ms/s fall and also there's no way that is a vacuum chamber as we are told.
Also nobody is timing any fall. They are pretending a feather and bowling ball fall at the same rate in that nonsense of a vacuum chamber.

I also asked for physical proof.
Were you there?

What time do you think an object would take to fall 37m ignoring air resistance?

What is, to you, physical proof?

You can't ignore air resistance, that's the issue.
This is why the 9.81 is nonsense as a constant in a so called vacuum.

Seriously.
Thats the whole point and why the 37m vacuum tower is so awesome.
The air was sucked out so resistence is gone.
Note the video shows the feather does NOT change shape because it was NOT catching wind.

You can't ignore air resistance, that's the issue.

But you can either:

• ignore air resistance if the weight of an object is enough greater than the force of the air-resistance at the final velocity or
• calculate the air resistance and use both the force gravity (due to g ≈ 9.81 m/s²) of the force of the air-resistance.

This is why the 9.81 is nonsense as a constant in a so called vacuum.

Incorrect!
The reduced air pressure (the "so called vacuum") in the "vacuum chamber" needs only to be reduced to what is classed as a "high vacuum" for air resistance to be close enough to negligible.

A "high vacuum" has an air pressure in the range 0.000 1 to 0.000 000 1 Pa compared to a usual atmospheric pressure of a little over 100 000 Pa.

So the 9.81 m/s² is certainly no nonsense as demonstrated with the feather and bowling ball in the "so called vacuum chamber".

No way in all hell is that big chamber anything like a vacuum chamber.

Is it that vacuum chambers/containers don't exist or that this chamber is too big to be a vacuum chamber?

I'm not going to waste my time on silly Cavendish experiments or the silly huge pretend vacuum chamber.
This is used by people who have nothing to argue with.

It's a pretty simple question. Not much time wasting required. I'll make it easy:

1) Do vacuum chambers/containers exist and can get to a near vacuum environment?

A) Yes
B) No

2) If A, is the chamber referenced too large to get to a near vacuum state?

A) Yes, it is too large to do so
B) No, it's largeness does not matter, a near vacuum state can be achieved

I'm not going to waste my time on silly Cavendish experiments

Of you aren't "going to waste your time on . . .  Cavendish experiments" for the simple reason that you can think of no way to refute an experiment repeated many dozens of times.

It's just what you do! Ignore and ridicule anything that debunks your baseless hypotheses.

or the silly huge pretend vacuum chamber.

No-one pretends that the World's Largest Vacuum Chamber at NASA Glenn Research Center ever has a "perfect vacuum".
But it can be evacuated to a pressure classed as a "high vacuum".

The chamber can reach a vacuum level of 2×10^–6 torr in less than 8 hr.

That 2×10^–6 torr is ¹/_380,000,000 of normal sea level atmospheric pressure.

If you have any contrary evidence, please present it. And your ridicule is not evidence!

This is used by people who have nothing to argue with.

No those things are denied "by people who have nothing to argue" against them with.

But, Sceppy, there are numerous videos on YouTube demonstrating that objects, no matter what their density, fall in the same time when free of air resistance.

But you simply deny all physical evidence contrary to your hypotheses.

guys, professor scepti has already admitted he denies all reason and that everything and everyone is in conspiracy against him.
He asked for proof, was given video evidence, yet denies it.
Apparently things don't fall and 37m is not high (that's ~ten stories btw).
He doesn't believe a pressure vessel exists or can be removed of all (near all) air despite a whole industry of manufacturing processes that rely on such a feat.
He asks for physical evidence yet all his responses are "thought" experiments.
He is delusional in his quest and should be lumped in with the likes of Wise and Danang.
Keep trying to redefine flight paths and pi/phew and "density".
thanks for coming out, scepti.
Should we revisit in another 2years?

I'm not going to waste my time on silly Cavendish experiments or the silly huge pretend vacuum chamber.
This is used by people who have nothing to argue with.

Who do you think you are to tell me I have "nothing to argue with"?  I DID THE CAVENDISH EXPERIMENT!  I know what I'm talking about and you too closed minded to face the truth. 

This is the problem with all these flat earth theories.  You and people like you won't accept anything that doesn't fit your preconceived notion of how your world should look so rather than test it yourself (because you can't deal with the results) you dismiss anything you can't explain.

You have no basis to call the dismiss these experiments because you haven't done them.  You are the one who has nothing to argue with.  That's why out just dismiss these experiments.  You can't explain why they work the way they do (it's fact that they do work) so you'll just ignore them.

You and all other flat earthers are weeks away from proving beyond a shadow of a doubt.  All FE's need to do is run the experiments, launch your own weather balloons or even better use BoB's gofundme money to launch your own camera to get pictures of the curve/no-curve, or take one of those excursions to Antarctica.  Of course none of you will because you know you won't get the answers you're all so desperately clinging to.

This rant may be a bit over the top but I'm tired of being dismissed and called a liar for things I've actually done; things I know to be the truth.  You have not right to dismiss these things because you have never done them.  All you do is bury your head in the sand so you don't have to face reality.

Mike

haha
mike needs to spend some time in the angry rant page.

Scepti probably also has opinions about movies he hasn’t seen yet

It's a pretty simple question. Not much time wasting required. I'll make it easy:

1) Do vacuum chambers/containers exist and can get to a near vacuum environment?

A) Yes
B) No

No.

2) If A, is the chamber referenced too large to get to a near vacuum state?

A) Yes, it is too large to do so
B) No, it's largeness does not matter, a near vacuum state can be achieved

There's no c) which would be, a vacuum cannot be achieved.

Let's talk about lowering pressure by evacuation.
That's how it works.

Quote from: sceptimatic on December 12, 2018, 10:35:19 PM

I'm not going to waste my time on silly Cavendish experiments

Of you aren't "going to waste your time on . . .  Cavendish experiments" for the simple reason that you can think of no way to refute an experiment repeated many dozens of times.

It's just what you do! Ignore and ridicule anything that debunks your baseless hypotheses.

Quote from: sceptimatic

or the silly huge pretend vacuum chamber.

No-one pretends that the World's Largest Vacuum Chamber at NASA Glenn Research Center ever has a "perfect vacuum".
But it can be evacuated to a pressure classed as a "high vacuum".

Quote

The chamber can reach a vacuum level of 2×10^–6 torr in less than 8 hr.

That 2×10^–6 torr is ¹/_380,000,000 of normal sea level atmospheric pressure.

If you have any contrary evidence, please present it. And your ridicule is not evidence!

Quote from: sceptimatic

This is used by people who have nothing to argue with.

No those things are denied "by people who have nothing to argue" against them with.

But, Sceppy, there are numerous videos on YouTube demonstrating that objects, no matter what their density, fall in the same time when free of air resistance.

But you simply deny all physical evidence contrary to your hypotheses.

No I don't deny physical evidence.
I deny the pretence of physical evidence. There is a massive difference.

You cannot physically prove anything you are saying but you seem to think citing books and video is physical evidence.
Then you cite Cavendish experiments as showing gravity because mass attracts mass,you say.
You argue that some silly set up that moves on a pivot with mass on each end moving towards another mass over a long period of time....and you call this proof of gravity.

That's why I tell you to leave it out.

It seems you're scared of the simplicity of denpressure and you can't grasp it so you use all kinds of obscure nonsense to somehow back yourself up.

Scepti continues to confuse evryone by misusing words...

Ok
"Evacuation".
Can you evacuate most of the air out of a pressure vessel?

guys, professor scepti has already admitted he denies all reason and that everything and everyone is in conspiracy against him.
He asked for proof, was given video evidence, yet denies it.
Apparently things don't fall and 37m is not high (that's ~ten stories btw).
He doesn't believe a pressure vessel exists or can be removed of all (near all) air despite a whole industry of manufacturing processes that rely on such a feat.
He asks for physical evidence yet all his responses are "thought" experiments.
He is delusional in his quest and should be lumped in with the likes of Wise and Danang.
Keep trying to redefine flight paths and pi/phew and "density".
thanks for coming out, scepti.
Should we revisit in another 2years?

Maybe that would be best. It'll give you time to brush up on the absolute basics....like the start which you haven't grasped as of yet.

Yes scepti.
DenP is so simple yet every time its picked appart you claim we're opening a can of worms that is too complicatd to get into.
So simple.

Forget cavendish.
Physical evidence - things fall at 9.81
Why are you against this very measurable fact?

Quote from: rabinoz on December 13, 2018, 12:58:37 AM

Quote from: sceptimatic on December 12, 2018, 10:35:19 PM

I'm not going to waste my time on silly Cavendish experiments

Of you aren't "going to waste your time on . . .  Cavendish experiments" for the simple reason that you can think of no way to refute an experiment repeated many dozens of times.

It's just what you do! Ignore and ridicule anything that debunks your baseless hypotheses.

Quote from: sceptimatic

or the silly huge pretend vacuum chamber.

No-one pretends that the World's Largest Vacuum Chamber at NASA Glenn Research Center ever has a "perfect vacuum".
But it can be evacuated to a pressure classed as a "high vacuum".

Quote

The chamber can reach a vacuum level of 2×10^–6 torr in less than 8 hr.

That 2×10^–6 torr is ¹/_380,000,000 of normal sea level atmospheric pressure.

If you have any contrary evidence, please present it. And your ridicule is not evidence!

Quote from: sceptimatic

This is used by people who have nothing to argue with.

No those things are denied "by people who have nothing to argue" against them with.

But, Sceppy, there are numerous videos on YouTube demonstrating that objects, no matter what their density, fall in the same time when free of air resistance.

But you simply deny all physical evidence contrary to your hypotheses.

No I don't deny physical evidence.
I deny the pretence of physical evidence. There is a massive difference.

You cannot physically prove anything you are saying but you seem to think citing books and video is physical evidence.
Then you cite Cavendish experiments as showing gravity because mass attracts mass,you say.
You argue that some silly set up that moves on a pivot with mass on each end moving towards another mass over a long period of time....and you call this proof of gravity.

That's why I tell you to leave it out.

It seems you're scared of the simplicity of denpressure and you can't grasp it so you use all kinds of obscure nonsense to somehow back yourself up.

Just a reminder, you have provided zero evidence for denpressure.

Forget everyones evidence and obscure reasons and theories be it gravity or denp.
He claims he is realistically viewing the physical world in its simplicity.
Then he flat out disbelieves a thing will fall at 9.81m/s/s.
Regardless of reason why it falls.
Easily measurable.
Easily reproducible.
Easily repeatable.

Forget gravity.
Forget flat earth.
Why does he not believe reality that a thing will fall?
Blows my mind.

He’s just dumb. Back in the day he would say something stupid and then have to stick to it. Like when he said inertia doesn’t exist. He had to claim a golf club created a 1000 mph wind to carry the golf ball down the fairway.

And the whole being a millionaire thing. He was just jealous. Also why he said college degrees were stupid and then claimed to have 22 of them. He then posted a fake picture of one.