Because the object always has a foundation when it shows weight.
That doesn't address the question at all. The question is why the air still manages to push down.
But lets go with that.
That means if you are in a blimp or a plane, and thus are not on a foundation, the object won't show weight and instead will float or go up?
But that never happens in reality.
The force would be all around the object's dense mass. But the atmosphere above is much stronger than the atmosphere below.
How is the atmosphere above much stronger?
What are you basing this on?
If this was the case the pressure would increase as you increased altitude, not decrease as it is observed to do.
Did you not read what I said to Jackblack about the water in the sink?
Did you not read how I explained how that doesn't work at all?
I don't mind repeating anything or giving different analogies or whatever if I believe a person to be genuinely trying to understand it.
Well there is your issue. Continuing with repeating the same nonsense or just trying to rely upon analogies which simply don't work.
Try an actual explanation.
So the atmosphere is more dense above a suspended object than below it, and the compression of this denser atmosphere above it gives a greater pressure on the object than the less dense atmosphere below it, and there is a net force downward?
Yes due to atmospheric molecular stacking from ground and ocean to the top of the dome.
No. Completely wrong.
The higher you are, the less dense the atmosphere is, the less pressure it has.
It is quite well known that if you have a mixture of different densities and they separate, the denser substance is on the bottom and the less dense is on the top.
So if we correct this massive error of yours, we instead get an upwards force from the atmosphere. We can also do the math to figure out what this upwards force will be and find out it is just the buoyant force.
If we instead just use your error, we find a mostly insignificant force which always pushes down meaning no object would ever float in the air.
You push up a mass that is dense enough to displace the atmosphere you pushed it into and that displacement of atmosphere pushes and crushes right back. Action and equal and opposite reaction.
No it isn't.
Again, you are standing against a wall and push an object out, the atmosphere doesn't push back.
If you have a sealed dome of air on a flat table but you could push a lead block through the table via an air tight seal, then you can understand how that lead block adds to the compression of the air inside that dome, right?
No. We aren't talking about magically adding something to the atmosphere.
Instead we have a lead block already in the atmosphere.
We can see how moving it around will just move the atmosphere around, not magically compress it more.
You could never apply the word " weight" to that lead block because there's no way to measure
Sure we can. Just because you can't measure its weight doesn't mean it doesn't exist.
The atmosphere compresses against the block and the block resists... but to resist it has to have a solid foundation. It does not and so it is pushed and compressed against weaker resistance of foundation.
But it isn't really resisting. Instead it would be the foundation that resists. And water will resist. Water doesn't like getting pushed out of the way, far more so than air, so it will resist movement through it and try to crush objects.
Water clearly can resist quite well, with objects floating on it which would otherwise fall to the ground.
Either all objects should float as water can resist the push of the atmosphere, or none should as the water can't resist the push of the atmosphere, or there should be no movement at all as there is pressure acting all around.
In order to explain only some objects sinking or floating you need to introduce a new force which has nothing to do with the atmosphere.
It's just a case of understanding that it's all to do with denpressure and nothing to do with a massive dupe called gravity.
Except you have been completely unable to explain how it works with denspressure.
Until you can show it is, we aren't going to be accepting that it's all to do with denpressure.
You don't know what reality is, except what you were schooled to think it is.
Not everyone is as ignorant as you.
Plenty of people have done experiments to understand reality, which shows your nonsense to be nonsense.
Now, why do things fall?
Try to answer without completely contradicting reality.
Porosity is also dimensionless, so no units. It's a ratio of volumes. If you are going to try and get in the way of a discussion with your usual inane questions, at least try to know the basics.
Porosity can be measured in many ways, depending upon what field you are in.
Yes, one of the simplest is a ratio of volumes, but you can also do surface area to volume, surface area to mass or volume to mass.
But these aren't technically dimensionless. They are quantities of dimension 1, and would have a unit of 1, but in the case of porosity, dimensions of V/V, e.g. l/l would be better.
They are often expressed without a unit being specified, but can still be given a symbol such as ppm, %, B, and so on.
Importantly, you need some statement of what it is in order to determine what you are measuring.
As an example, a quantity of 5% could mean a variety of things, depending upon what the base units were.
This is especially important with his insane rejection of reality where porosity could be mass per mass, or mass per volume based upon how much air gets into it.
So asking him what units sure seems perfectly reasonable.
If you want to try getting in the way of discussion with your usual pedantic BS, try not to make a fool of yourself.