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

  • 3822 Replies
  • 265015 Views
Re: Den Pressure - A Definable Hypothesis & Experiments (Scepti, iWitness)
« Reply #2880 on: January 03, 2019, 12:20:39 PM »
the basics is what we need to get past
That's right, and you are seriously failing at that.
You can't even provide a reason for something as basic as why things fall.

If a balloon with a tiny amount of atmospheric air inside and tied can inflate inside a chamber under evacuation, it tells you that the molecules inside that balloon are expanding to push that balloon into inflation. This only happens because the evacuation of molecules allow it.
No it doesn't. Not in the slightest. That would require air pressure to be non-existent.
Instead as we know there is air pressure all this means is that the pressure on the outside of the balloon is significantly lower than the inside, so the air inside pushes the balloon outwards. In doing so its pressure drops. This continues until the pressure is balanced (along with a contribution from the elastic surface of the balloon). There is no reason to think the molecules themselves expand.

The point is the density of molecules the feather will collide with as opposed to what it did before.
But why should it matter?

As an instance. Water is more dense than air. Helium and hydrogen are less dense than both...and so on.
So what?
That has little to do with the viscosity, which is what actually matters.
You can have a low density, high viscosity fluid and a high density low viscosity fluid.

As a simple example even you have access to, oil and water.
Water is more dense than oil, yet is more viscous.
Try moving a feather through water and through oil. See what disturbs it more. It wont be the water.

As for your gobstoppers, they can't explain anything and have absolutely no basis in reality.

Now again:
WHY DO THINGS FALL?

*

sceptimatic

  • Flat Earth Scientist
  • 28338
Re: Den Pressure - A massive pile of self contradictory nonsense.
« Reply #2881 on: January 03, 2019, 02:19:08 PM »


What supporting evidence do you have that molecules are like gobstoppers?  What instrumentation did you use to determine this?
What proof is there of an atom and also it having a nucleus?
What proof is tehre of a lot of the stuff mainstream science throws out?
It's all theory backed up by explanations that have zero proof.

Don't be asking me how I know that molecules are like gobstoppers and their layers.
Just accept that I have my reasons and I give my reasons. You do not have to believe anything I say but you need to accept what I say to understand my theory.
Failure to do so will render your attempts at debating it, pointless.

*

sceptimatic

  • Flat Earth Scientist
  • 28338
Re: Den Pressure - A Definable Hypothesis & Experiments (Scepti, iWitness)
« Reply #2882 on: January 03, 2019, 02:31:14 PM »

Lets give a simple and basic analogy.
You (atmopheric denP) are pushing a ball down onto the floor in your house.
Then, you basically climb up onto the roof and push down on the roof (top of pressure vessel).
You no longer simple in direct contact with the ball.
How is the ball then crushed to the foundation?
Because the room is still under pressure more from above than below and the dense mass of the ball displaces it's own dense mass of that atmosphere still in the room.

Re: Den Pressure - A Definable Hypothesis & Experiments (Scepti, iWitness)
« Reply #2883 on: January 03, 2019, 02:36:21 PM »

Lets give a simple and basic analogy.
You (atmopheric denP) are pushing a ball down onto the floor in your house.
Then, you basically climb up onto the roof and push down on the roof (top of pressure vessel).
You no longer simple in direct contact with the ball.
How is the ball then crushed to the foundation?
Because the room is still under pressure more from above than below and the dense mass of the ball displaces it's own dense mass of that atmosphere still in the room.

Read it again.
You are the atmoshphere.
Your hand pushing is the crush of the atmosphere.
The roof is now protecting the ball (isolating the same way a pressure vessel).
You can no longer place your hand directly or even indirectly on the ball.

How does the ball get pushed down?

*

sceptimatic

  • Flat Earth Scientist
  • 28338
Re: Den Pressure - A Definable Hypothesis & Experiments (Scepti, iWitness)
« Reply #2884 on: January 03, 2019, 02:38:11 PM »
Water is more dense than oil, yet is more viscous.
Try moving a feather through water and through oil. See what disturbs it more. It wont be the water.


What's your point.
You're arguing as to why a feather doesn't flutter in your so called vacuum and I told you low pressure then gave you reasons for movement and reasons for little to no movement.

*

sceptimatic

  • Flat Earth Scientist
  • 28338
Re: Den Pressure - A Definable Hypothesis & Experiments (Scepti, iWitness)
« Reply #2885 on: January 03, 2019, 02:40:00 PM »

Lets give a simple and basic analogy.
You (atmopheric denP) are pushing a ball down onto the floor in your house.
Then, you basically climb up onto the roof and push down on the roof (top of pressure vessel).
You no longer simple in direct contact with the ball.
How is the ball then crushed to the foundation?
Because the room is still under pressure more from above than below and the dense mass of the ball displaces it's own dense mass of that atmosphere still in the room.

Read it again.
You are the atmoshphere.
Your hand pushing is the crush of the atmosphere.
The roof is now protecting the ball (isolating the same way a pressure vessel).
You can no longer place your hand directly or even indirectly on the ball.

How does the ball get pushed down?
You can't make me the atmosphere and then take me entirely out of the picture. This would indicate you claiming a vacuum. I claim low pressure so that means there's pressure still inside, so I have to leave something inside.

You're struggling.

Re: Den Pressure - A massive pile of self contradictory nonsense.
« Reply #2886 on: January 03, 2019, 03:01:17 PM »
What proof is there of an atom and also it having a nucleus?
What proof is tehre of a lot of the stuff mainstream science throws out?
It's all theory backed up by explanations that have zero proof.
You being ignorant of the proof/evidence doesn't magically mean it doesn't exist.
This is not a thread to discuss mainstream science. This is a thread to discuss your model.

What proof do you have for any of your claims? Absolutely none.
What evidence do you have? Absolutely none.

Don't be asking me how I know that molecules are like gobstoppers and their layers.
No. We will ask you.
You are baselessly asserting garbage with absolutely nothing to back it up.
We are not stupid enough to just accept that garbage. You will need to back it up.

but you need to accept what I say to understand my theory.
Except even just blindly accepting your nonsense, as soon as we start thinking about it, it all falls apart. You can't even get past why things fall.

Also, you don't have a theory. You have a refuted hypothesis.

Because the room is still under pressure more from above than below
No, the pressure is higher the lower you are.
If you want to try saying you are talking about amount, then if something is at the top of the vessel, it would be pushed up, not down, as there is more air below than above.

the dense mass of the ball displaces it's own dense mass of that atmosphere still in the room.
So what? That doesn't magically mean it falls.

So again, WHY DO THINGS FALL? You are yet to be able to answer that.

*

NotSoSkeptical

  • 7096
  • Flatness as in the shape of a water droplet.
Re: Den Pressure - A massive pile of self contradictory nonsense.
« Reply #2887 on: January 03, 2019, 03:03:56 PM »


What supporting evidence do you have that molecules are like gobstoppers?  What instrumentation did you use to determine this?
What proof is there of an atom and also it having a nucleus?
What proof is tehre of a lot of the stuff mainstream science throws out?
It's all theory backed up by explanations that have zero proof.

Don't be asking me how I know that molecules are like gobstoppers and their layers.
Just accept that I have my reasons and I give my reasons. You do not have to believe anything I say but you need to accept what I say to understand my theory.
Failure to do so will render your attempts at debating it, pointless.

Electron Microscopes.

As for your last part, I will take that as "I just pulled it out of my ass".  Thanks for admitting that.
Rabinoz RIP

Re: Den Pressure - A Definable Hypothesis & Experiments (Scepti, iWitness)
« Reply #2888 on: January 03, 2019, 03:07:15 PM »

Lets give a simple and basic analogy.
You (atmopheric denP) are pushing a ball down onto the floor in your house.
Then, you basically climb up onto the roof and push down on the roof (top of pressure vessel).
You no longer simple in direct contact with the ball.
How is the ball then crushed to the foundation?
Because the room is still under pressure more from above than below and the dense mass of the ball displaces it's own dense mass of that atmosphere still in the room.

Read it again.
You are the atmoshphere.
Your hand pushing is the crush of the atmosphere.
The roof is now protecting the ball (isolating the same way a pressure vessel).
You can no longer place your hand directly or even indirectly on the ball.

How does the ball get pushed down?
You can't make me the atmosphere and then take me entirely out of the picture. This would indicate you claiming a vacuum. I claim low pressure so that means there's pressure still inside, so I have to leave something inside.

You're struggling.

Yes...struggling to find out what youre up to.

Haha ok
Everybody pay attention!!!!

Scepis last statement here says if he were the atmosphere and the house were a pressure vessel, it is impossible to isolate the pressure vessel from the atmosphere.

So full circe back to my question about pumps and how do you breathe!

Scepti please answer yes nos:
The atmosphere was pushed back by the pump.
Then the vessel closed off.
Resulting in larger moleculed at a lower pressure.
- Yes no?

But the atmosphere is still in contact if a lead block were inside the vessel, still pushing it down to the foundation
- yes no?

Even though, pressure os different inside vs outside and rhat pressure is the cause of downward push?
- yes no?
« Last Edit: January 03, 2019, 03:09:02 PM by Themightykabool »

*

sceptimatic

  • Flat Earth Scientist
  • 28338
Re: Den Pressure - A Definable Hypothesis & Experiments (Scepti, iWitness)
« Reply #2889 on: January 03, 2019, 03:17:12 PM »

Lets give a simple and basic analogy.
You (atmopheric denP) are pushing a ball down onto the floor in your house.
Then, you basically climb up onto the roof and push down on the roof (top of pressure vessel).
You no longer simple in direct contact with the ball.
How is the ball then crushed to the foundation?
Because the room is still under pressure more from above than below and the dense mass of the ball displaces it's own dense mass of that atmosphere still in the room.

Read it again.
You are the atmoshphere.
Your hand pushing is the crush of the atmosphere.
The roof is now protecting the ball (isolating the same way a pressure vessel).
You can no longer place your hand directly or even indirectly on the ball.

How does the ball get pushed down?
You can't make me the atmosphere and then take me entirely out of the picture. This would indicate you claiming a vacuum. I claim low pressure so that means there's pressure still inside, so I have to leave something inside.

You're struggling.

Yes...struggling to find out what youre up to.

Haha ok
Everybody pay attention!!!!

Scepis last statement here says if he were the atmosphere and the house were a pressure vessel, it is impossible to isolate the pressure vessel from the atmosphere.

So full circe back to my question about pumps and how do you breathe!

Scepti please answer yes nos:
The atmosphere was pushed back by the pump.
Then the vessel closed off.
Resulting in larger less moleculed at a lower pressure.
- Yes no?

But the atmosphere is still in contact if a lead block were inside the vessel, still pushing it down to the foundation
- yes no?

Even though, pressure os different inside vs outside and rhat pressure is the cause of downward push?
- yes no?
In bold.

Re: Den Pressure - A Definable Hypothesis & Experiments (Scepti, iWitness)
« Reply #2890 on: January 03, 2019, 03:21:50 PM »
Pretty sure you said molecules expanded under lower pressure like a ballooon

*

sceptimatic

  • Flat Earth Scientist
  • 28338
Re: Den Pressure - A Definable Hypothesis & Experiments (Scepti, iWitness)
« Reply #2891 on: January 03, 2019, 03:24:54 PM »
Pretty sure you said molecules expanded under lower pressure like a ballooon
Yep, they do but you need to understand why and the gobstopper and layers is key to why it works but you aren't even at the basic stage yet so it's pointless me going into that.

You've spent far too much time trying to ridicule and every time you do it you take a step backwards.

Re: Den Pressure - A Definable Hypothesis & Experiments (Scepti, iWitness)
« Reply #2892 on: January 03, 2019, 03:30:35 PM »
Doggedogdgdodge.

Your gobstopper model solves none of the recent y/n questions.

But feel free if any of those are answered by yes/no/gobstopper.

*

sceptimatic

  • Flat Earth Scientist
  • 28338
Re: Den Pressure - A Definable Hypothesis & Experiments (Scepti, iWitness)
« Reply #2893 on: January 03, 2019, 03:35:51 PM »
Doggedogdgdodge.

Your gobstopper model solves none of the recent y/n questions.

But feel free if any of those are answered by yes/no/gobstopper.
You're not helping yourself.

Re: Den Pressure - A Definable Hypothesis & Experiments (Scepti, iWitness)
« Reply #2894 on: January 03, 2019, 04:38:23 PM »
You're not helping yourself.
And you're not helping anyone. Instead you just keep trying to dodge.

Again, WHY DO THINGS FALL?

Re: Den Pressure - A Definable Hypothesis & Experiments (Scepti, iWitness)
« Reply #2895 on: January 03, 2019, 04:38:43 PM »
Neither are you.
We're appraching triple digit pg count.
"Definable" and "experiment" no where in sight.

Gobstoppers have nothing to answer the isolation against atmoshpere question.
Redhering and hand wave some more.

*

Slemon

  • Flat Earth Researcher
  • 11690
Re: Den Pressure - A Definable Hypothesis & Experiments (Scepti, iWitness)
« Reply #2896 on: January 03, 2019, 04:52:29 PM »
We're appraching triple digit pg count.
"Definable" and "experiment" no where in sight.
You must've missed the first page then.

Re: Den Pressure - A Definable Hypothesis & Experiments (Scepti, iWitness)
« Reply #2897 on: January 03, 2019, 04:59:44 PM »
We're appraching triple digit pg count.
"Definable" and "experiment" no where in sight.
You must've missed the first page then.

Truw An answer is an answer... but you shown here and other posts to not care to the correctness or verification of the definiton/ experiment.
Have the variables been isolated and tested for independecne?
Scepti himself has admitted these are all thought experiemnts.
97pgs have present refuting results and alternate experiements to show denp to be incorrect inferences.

*

sceptimatic

  • Flat Earth Scientist
  • 28338
Re: Den Pressure - A Definable Hypothesis & Experiments (Scepti, iWitness)
« Reply #2898 on: January 04, 2019, 12:37:20 AM »

Scepti himself has admitted these are all thought experiemnts.
97pgs have present refuting results and alternate experiements to show denp to be incorrect inferences.
First of all we can't see what's in molecules so we have to work out what the best scenario could be in how they work.
That's not just me, it's every scientist on Earth.
The issue is, those who govern (authority) get to dictate how the picture is painted.

That's fine for those who adhere to that. I have my own way and nobody has scuppered it because nobody understands it all.
Jane is closest to understanding it even if she doesn't agree to any of it.
« Last Edit: January 04, 2019, 12:40:11 AM by sceptimatic »

Re: Den Pressure - A Definable Hypothesis & Experiments (Scepti, iWitness)
« Reply #2899 on: January 04, 2019, 02:05:39 AM »
First of all we can't see what's in molecules
Again, not everyone is as ignorant as you. Stop pretending they are.

Jane is closest to understanding it even if she doesn't agree to any of it.
The only reason you say that is because she isn't calling you out on all your flaws and seems to love trying to prop FEers up.

I understand, and I understand it doesn't work and makes no sense.
If you want to change my mind you will need to do more than pathetic assertions and dismissals.

Now again: Why do things fall?

*

sceptimatic

  • Flat Earth Scientist
  • 28338
Re: Den Pressure - A Definable Hypothesis & Experiments (Scepti, iWitness)
« Reply #2900 on: January 04, 2019, 02:26:55 AM »

Now again: Why do things fall?
Denpressure.

Same question to you.
Why do things fall?

Re: Den Pressure - A Definable Hypothesis & Experiments (Scepti, iWitness)
« Reply #2901 on: January 04, 2019, 02:31:05 AM »
Denpressure.
That is not an answer.
Provide an actual explanation.

Same question to you.
This is a thread to discuss your model, not mine.
If you wish to know why things fall in reality (or current models of reality) start a new thread.
The only reason you have to ask here is to distract from your inability to explain it.

So again:
Why do things fall?

Re: Den Pressure - A Definable Hypothesis & Experiments (Scepti, iWitness)
« Reply #2902 on: January 04, 2019, 04:18:36 AM »
Ah no one know molecules or can see molecules.
How does the gobstopper model fit observable outcomes?

And dodgddogedoge.
Answer the wuestions from before.

Scepti please answer yes nos:
The atmosphere was pushed back by the pump.
Then the vessel closed off.
Resulting in less qty but larger molecules at a lower pressure.
- Yes no?

But the atmosphere is still in contact if a lead block were inside the vessel, still pushing it down to the foundation
- yes no?

Even though, pressure os different inside vs outside and rhat pressure is the cause of downward push?
- yes no?

Re: Den Pressure - A Definable Hypothesis & Experiments (Scepti, iWitness)
« Reply #2903 on: January 04, 2019, 04:23:33 AM »

Now again: Why do things fall?
Denpressure.

Seems to be irrelevant, from what you previously said.  Don't things fall to the ground because that is their foundation?
Quote from: mikeman7918
a single photon can pass through two sluts

Quote from: Chicken Fried Clucker
if Donald Trump stuck his penis in me after trying on clothes I would have that date and time burned in my head.

*

sceptimatic

  • Flat Earth Scientist
  • 28338
Re: Den Pressure - A Definable Hypothesis & Experiments (Scepti, iWitness)
« Reply #2904 on: January 04, 2019, 04:54:09 AM »
Denpressure.
That is not an answer.
Provide an actual explanation.

Same question to you.
This is a thread to discuss your model, not mine.
If you wish to know why things fall in reality (or current models of reality) start a new thread.
The only reason you have to ask here is to distract from your inability to explain it.

So again:
Why do things fall?
Denpressure.

Same question once again, to you.
Why do things fall?

Re: Den Pressure - A Definable Hypothesis & Experiments (Scepti, iWitness)
« Reply #2905 on: January 04, 2019, 04:55:45 AM »
Quit dodging.
Thats a go no where question.
Yes no to my questions.
No exanation required.

*

sceptimatic

  • Flat Earth Scientist
  • 28338
Re: Den Pressure - A Definable Hypothesis & Experiments (Scepti, iWitness)
« Reply #2906 on: January 04, 2019, 05:24:20 AM »

Now again: Why do things fall?
Denpressure.

Seems to be irrelevant, from what you previously said.  Don't things fall to the ground because that is their foundation?
Nothing can fall unless they're taken from their foundation.

*

sceptimatic

  • Flat Earth Scientist
  • 28338
Re: Den Pressure - A Definable Hypothesis & Experiments (Scepti, iWitness)
« Reply #2907 on: January 04, 2019, 05:24:53 AM »
Quit dodging.
Thats a go no where question.
Yes no to my questions.
No exanation required.
What question?

Re: Den Pressure - A Definable Hypothesis & Experiments (Scepti, iWitness)
« Reply #2908 on: January 04, 2019, 06:33:26 AM »
Quit dodging.
Thats a go no where question.
Yes no to my questions.
No exanation required.
What question?
Fksakes either you are king of the trolls or completely retarded.

Go no where question is:
Prove gravity - cavendsih - dossnt mean anyhing - and on and on...

My quesion is:

Scepti please answer yes nos:
The atmosphere was pushed back by the pump.
Then the vessel closed off.
Resulting in less qty but larger molecules at a lower pressure.
- Yes no?

But the atmosphere is still in contact if a lead block were inside the vessel, still pushing it down to the foundation
- yes no?

Even though, pressure is different inside vs outside and that pressure is the cause of downward push?
- yes no?

*

sceptimatic

  • Flat Earth Scientist
  • 28338
Re: Den Pressure - A Definable Hypothesis & Experiments (Scepti, iWitness)
« Reply #2909 on: January 04, 2019, 07:49:29 AM »
Quit dodging.
Thats a go no where question.
Yes no to my questions.
No exanation required.
What question?
Fksakes either you are king of the trolls or completely retarded.

Go no where question is:
Prove gravity - cavendsih - dossnt mean anyhing - and on and on...

My quesion is:

Scepti please answer yes nos:
The atmosphere was pushed back by the pump.
Yes.

 
Quote from: Themightykabool
Then the vessel closed off.
Yes.

Quote from: Themightykabool
Resulting in less qty but larger molecules at a lower pressure.

- Yes no?
Yes.

Quote from: Themightykabool
But the atmosphere is still in contact if a lead block were inside the vessel, still pushing it down to the foundation
- yes no?
Yes.
Quote from: Themightykabool
Even though, pressure is different inside vs outside and that pressure is the cause of downward push?
- yes no?
Yes.