But you accept gravity. Hmmmm.
Yes, like I accept the other fundamental forces of nature. They are backed up by loads of evidence. You are not appealing to a fundamental force of nature. You appealing to an interaction between a solid object and the atmosphere and relying upon pressure.
You appeal to an unknown force due to being schooled into that. Deny it if you wish.
I'm simply showing that atmospheric pressure is the reason for measured scale weight, for reasons I've already given, countless times.
Correct. The force of any dense mass displacing its own dense mass against the atmospheric pressure.
I see no connection to displacing the atmosphere other than due to buoyancy (which some people don't include under weight).
It's a mixture, depending on the porosity of an object and whether it can be overcome by atmospheric squeeze to be squeezed up.
The issue is in how much of that atmosphere any object takes up by it's mass that determines whether it displaces more of it than the atmosphere below it, can resist.
The only way it can resist is if the mass of molecules can squeeze and hold the object or squeeze that object UP.
Water does a sterling job of it
There's no such thing as pull, except for the word we are all designed to believe is a pull. It's all push. We've been though this.
Yes, we have been through this and you weren't able to justify it at all.
When the object is below me, there is no way for me to push it up. But I can pull it up.
You have to think of how you're supposedly pulling it up to understand that you're not.
Let me give you an example.
You want to supposedly
pull up a wooden block from the ground with your hands.
Let's see how many ways this can be achieved.
You can push your fingers under it so that your fingerprints push into the underside of that block.
You now have yo raise it but first you need something to push against to achieve it.
You're stood on ground so you use your feet as your foundation against the ground as your feets foundation.
Now you need to push that block up with your fingers.
If you could be stood under those fingers you would see that they are pushing the block up.
Even if you tied rope around the block and gripped that rope, you are using the inside of that rope that is under and around the block to squeeze it and push, aided by your squeezing grip, which is a push and your feet pushing into the ground to aid in pushing that block up.
Nowhere is there any pulling.
Of course it can be argued because we are naturally schooled into push and pull. But to understand the stuff that's going on around us (imo) against what we're schooled into, it becomes a whole new logical in your face reality than the fictional one we are designed to simply follow without much question.
It has everything to do with atmospheric pressure and nothing to do with fictional gravity.
Then explain how. You are yet to do so. And stop bringing gravity into it.
I've more than explained. You refuse to acknowledge it and fair enough. That's your issue, not mine.
You displace the atmosphere, which exerts pressure in all directions.
Yep.
Good, glad we got that clarified. That means it shouldn't be pushing an object down. It pushes it inwards.
It squeezes, just like water squeezes a ship, but the ship still displaces water and atmosphere by the ship's own dense mass (structure) displacing atmosphere at first and secondly using the water as its foundation, which becomes an unstable foundation in terms of not being a solid resistance.
The dense mass of that ship is pushing it's own mass of atmosphere away from it and that atmosphere is pushing right back onto it of which the water is now resisting.
The fact that the ship has lots of volume means the atmosphere equalises with that volume which ensures the ship is not pushed down further to overcome the dense water resisting it.
No such thing as suck just as there's no such thing as pull.
Which is why I put it in quotes. But notice how you are just appealing to semantics?
Call it what you will but I'm telling it from my side, because from my side this is how it is.
They're all based upon force and pressure.
No, not all are based upon pressure.
And if that is the case, why bring up energy?
Nothing moves without energy applied. Energy is just another push or expansion of matter onto matter. It's all pressures and vibrational frequencies.
Nope, not at all. The volume is the atmosphere. That's the equalisation force of pressure with the atmosphere.
No. Regardless of where the object is, it is displacing the atmosphere as the atmosphere isn't occupying the volume the object is taking up, with the sole exception of when you put it into another fluid which is isolated from the atmosphere.
In that case it would be displacing that fluid.
If the volume of a box is in the atmosphere then that volume is classed as the box being porous if it is a sealed box. Trapped atmosphere just like the structures can also be porous, like a sponge if you were to look real close.
Some are easily seen and others can't be seen due to us not being of very good sight which is where magnification comes in.
The least amount of porosity an object has means the biggest amount of displacement of atmosphere for its observable mass.
Moving it up just means it is displacing a different region of the atmosphere. The same volume is still displaced.
Volume displaces nothing.
That's what creates what we know as, buoyant force in a denser environment to the atmosphere....like water.
We have been over this before, it isn't. Not in the slightest. The buoyant force relies upon gravity generating a pressure gradient in the fluid which results in an upwards force on the object as the pressure is greater the lower you are. It also applies to all fluids, not just water, but also the atmosphere.
But we haven't even finished with the basics of why an object falls, so lets not get to more complicated things yet.
It's pretty clear to anyone that atmospheric pressure being displaced by dense mass of objects is what gives us a man made weight measurement.
Gravity is a so called theory. Nobody knows what it is but are willing to accept it does what they're told because it keeps the spinning globe and space, etc, alive.
But we won't go too far into that.
It's squeezed down by compression of it's own atmospheric displacement upon it's own dense mass.
Compression is squeezing inwards, like the bottle above getting crushed. It isn't downwards.
Again, why is it pushed down?
For anything to squeeze it has to be pushed to be pushed back on with equal force.
If you are in a crowd getting crushed, you resist that crush by expanding your body by using your energy to push against all crushing sides.
If you were to suddenly eat a blueberry that was not quite fully tested, like Violet Beauregard then you would create a bigger compression against the crowd and in turn that crowd would crush back at you with that same force which would basically have you sat atop of that crowd due to them being more dense for that same area.
That would be buoyancy that happens because of crushing UP because the object is now less dense and expanded and unable to overcome the more dense objects below it.
Change that to molecules and we have the same thing.
What about a tree?
Trees don't just pop into existence from nowhere.
They push into existence from below and displace atmosphere as they do so, whilst using the ground as their leverage and foundation.
Their trunks and branches push up. Their roots push down and try to hold a steady foundation which is weak at first because they sink, just like a ship in water, except this is more dense Earth.
What's pushing that up when so called gravity should be pulling it down?
Again, we aren't discussing gravity.
It is being supported by its trunk and root system.
As Above.
A ship displaces atmosphere by being moved down into the water.
Nope. The ship displaces the atmosphere by being in the atmosphere. It displaces water by going into the water, which results in the water displacing the atmosphere.
Once it is in that water, it remains displacing the water regardless of where it is. But until we have a reason for the water to go down, there is no reason for the boat to be pushed up by the water.
So again, let's stick to the basics, why does the ship go down in the first place? Why doesn't it just fly through the air?
Refer to my explanation further up in this post.
Gravity
Again, we are not discussing gravity. Stop trying to attack it to prop up your model.
You need to explain why things fall.
I have explained.
Not quite sure where you're going with this.
The only remotely plausible model where the atmosphere creates the downwards pull, where it does so based upon a magically sustained inverted pressure/density gradient, causing the buoyant force to act downwards. It still doesn't match reality, but at least it has a downwards pull.
I've explained. take the time to grasp it properly.