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

  • 3822 Replies
  • 824096 Views
*

sceptimatic

  • Flat Earth Scientist
  • 30076
  • +3/-4
Re: Den Pressure - A Definable Hypothesis & Experiments (Scepti, iWitness)
« Reply #3300 on: January 20, 2019, 05:49:10 AM »
Why are we on an island measuring rocks with jugs of water?
The question was to sobchak.
The question was:
You are on the island with nothing. You can invent anything you want to but you have to know what you are inventing to solve issues because the litre and everything else does not exist. Nothing exists other than the food and water the island provides, plus the necessary stuff to manufacture whatever you can aid you to move forward.

In this case we need to find out how much the rock weighs on that beach.
What do you invent to start that off so we can understand weight?

I know we're going way off track here but there's a method in my asking, as you are aware.

*

sceptimatic

  • Flat Earth Scientist
  • 30076
  • +3/-4
Re: Den Pressure - A Definable Hypothesis & Experiments (Scepti, iWitness)
« Reply #3301 on: January 20, 2019, 05:54:17 AM »

There is the mass of the water.
So you have air pressure thats equal and also has the weight of the water.
By your logic the water should overthrow the eqution and be able to push its way out.
Nope.
We are talking about the card and the cup, right?

The stack of atmosphere under the water is far greater a resistance to it because it is not up against the upper atmosphere pushing that water down. You holding that cup sees to that along with the extreme low pressure inside that cup, whether it's a small gap at the top of the upturned cup or a tiny bubble.
It's still super low pressure of atmosphere and that is what we are dealing with in life. Everything is a direct result of what is above us in terms of working how it should.

?

Themightykabool

  • 13117
  • +58/-80
Re: Den Pressure - A Definable Hypothesis & Experiments (Scepti, iWitness)
« Reply #3302 on: January 20, 2019, 05:56:44 AM »
The same cupwatercard experiment can be done with zero air in the cup.
Try it.
The less compression the less push. Think about it.

what was compressed?
The atmosphere is compressed.

???
No air in cup.
Put a pressure gauge in the cup filled with water.
And repeat with a cup filled mostly with water.
Lets say 10% air inside.
Pressures the same
No compression difference.

?

Themightykabool

  • 13117
  • +58/-80
Re: Den Pressure - A Definable Hypothesis & Experiments (Scepti, iWitness)
« Reply #3303 on: January 20, 2019, 05:59:06 AM »
Why are we on an island measuring rocks with jugs of water?
The question was to sobchak.
The question was:
You are on the island with nothing. You can invent anything you want to but you have to know what you are inventing to solve issues because the litre and everything else does not exist. Nothing exists other than the food and water the island provides, plus the necessary stuff to manufacture whatever you can aid you to move forward.

In this case we need to find out how much the rock weighs on that beach.
What do you invent to start that off so we can understand weight?

I know we're going way off track here but there's a method in my asking, as you are aware.

Right.
We covered this portion.
Newly invented measurement of 1 jug of seawater.

Wheress the method going with this?

?

Themightykabool

  • 13117
  • +58/-80
Re: Den Pressure - A Definable Hypothesis & Experiments (Scepti, iWitness)
« Reply #3304 on: January 20, 2019, 06:01:07 AM »

There is the mass of the water.
So you have air pressure thats equal and also has the weight of the water.
By your logic the water should overthrow the eqution and be able to push its way out.
Nope.
We are talking about the card and the cup, right?

The stack of atmosphere under the water is far greater a resistance to it because it is not up against the upper atmosphere pushing that water down. You holding that cup sees to that along with the extreme low pressure inside that cup, whether it's a small gap at the top of the upturned cup or a tiny bubble.
It's still super low pressure of atmosphere and that is what we are dealing with in life. Everything is a direct result of what is above us in terms of working how it should.

Why is there an extreme low pressure?
You take a cup.
Fill it with water.
Put a card paper on top.
No mechanical pumpinh.
Flip the cup over fast.
The water seals and stays in the cup.
Pressure never changed.

*

sceptimatic

  • Flat Earth Scientist
  • 30076
  • +3/-4
Re: Den Pressure - A Definable Hypothesis & Experiments (Scepti, iWitness)
« Reply #3305 on: January 20, 2019, 06:01:16 AM »
The same cupwatercard experiment can be done with zero air in the cup.
Try it.
The less compression the less push. Think about it.

what was compressed?
The atmosphere is compressed.

???
No air in cup.
Put a pressure gauge in the cup filled with water.
And repeat with a cup filled mostly with water.
Lets say 10% air inside.
Pressures the same
No compression difference.
Why would there be?
It's inside the actual cup.

*

sceptimatic

  • Flat Earth Scientist
  • 30076
  • +3/-4
Re: Den Pressure - A Definable Hypothesis & Experiments (Scepti, iWitness)
« Reply #3306 on: January 20, 2019, 06:03:51 AM »
Why are we on an island measuring rocks with jugs of water?
The question was to sobchak.
The question was:
You are on the island with nothing. You can invent anything you want to but you have to know what you are inventing to solve issues because the litre and everything else does not exist. Nothing exists other than the food and water the island provides, plus the necessary stuff to manufacture whatever you can aid you to move forward.

In this case we need to find out how much the rock weighs on that beach.
What do you invent to start that off so we can understand weight?

I know we're going way off track here but there's a method in my asking, as you are aware.

Right.
We covered this portion.
Newly invented measurement of 1 jug of seawater.

Wheress the method going with this?
We need to understand a weight measurement to measure the mass of anything.
Balancing a mass with a jug of water is not going to measure all mass.

By all means keep going.

*

sceptimatic

  • Flat Earth Scientist
  • 30076
  • +3/-4
Re: Den Pressure - A Definable Hypothesis & Experiments (Scepti, iWitness)
« Reply #3307 on: January 20, 2019, 06:12:13 AM »


Why is there an extreme low pressure?
You take a cup.
Fill it with water.
Put a card paper on top.
No mechanical pumpinh.
Flip the cup over fast.
The water seals and stays in the cup.
Pressure never changed.
When you start to understand the atmosphere above you and how it's all stacked, you'll understand why you can reduce the pressure of that atmosphere from working against you to push things down.
It also disproves the fictional spouted gravity stone dead...but that should become obvious to those that pay attention.

Anyway, once you stop the upper atmosphere from pushing down on the water in the cup, you only leave whatever atmosphere is trapped in that cup or none as you say.
It means that the lower atmospheric stack below the card can easily resist the water inside that cup, along with the card itself.
This is achieved because you create the force that pushes back the atmosphere above along with your upturned cup.

If you cannot compress into the atmosphere it cannot compress back.
The cup prevents this, so even with a small amount of atmosphere trapped in the cup of water, the water is only pushed on by a small amount,
That small amount of trapped atmosphere is pushing against the inner top of the cup and using that as it's leverage and also the water as it's leverage.
A bit like a tiny Samson trying to push pillars apart but not being strong enough to do so.

Add more air and you add more compression which will push out the water and overcome the resisting lower stack.

?

Themightykabool

  • 13117
  • +58/-80
Re: Den Pressure - A Definable Hypothesis & Experiments (Scepti, iWitness)
« Reply #3308 on: January 20, 2019, 06:12:25 AM »
Why are we on an island measuring rocks with jugs of water?
The question was to sobchak.
The question was:
You are on the island with nothing. You can invent anything you want to but you have to know what you are inventing to solve issues because the litre and everything else does not exist. Nothing exists other than the food and water the island provides, plus the necessary stuff to manufacture whatever you can aid you to move forward.

In this case we need to find out how much the rock weighs on that beach.
What do you invent to start that off so we can understand weight?

I know we're going way off track here but there's a method in my asking, as you are aware.

Right.
We covered this portion.
Newly invented measurement of 1 jug of seawater.

Wheress the method going with this?
We need to understand a weight measurement to measure the mass of anything.
Balancing a mass with a jug of water is not going to measure all mass.

By all means keep going.

Keep going what?
No.
You keep going.
Youre the one who supposedly had a point.

All mass as in all the mass in the universe/ under the dome?
Theoretically i can create a balance scale infinitly large and can weigh anything.

You still havent made any point.

*

sceptimatic

  • Flat Earth Scientist
  • 30076
  • +3/-4
Re: Den Pressure - A Definable Hypothesis & Experiments (Scepti, iWitness)
« Reply #3309 on: January 20, 2019, 06:14:35 AM »
Why are we on an island measuring rocks with jugs of water?
The question was to sobchak.
The question was:
You are on the island with nothing. You can invent anything you want to but you have to know what you are inventing to solve issues because the litre and everything else does not exist. Nothing exists other than the food and water the island provides, plus the necessary stuff to manufacture whatever you can aid you to move forward.

In this case we need to find out how much the rock weighs on that beach.
What do you invent to start that off so we can understand weight?

I know we're going way off track here but there's a method in my asking, as you are aware.

Right.
We covered this portion.
Newly invented measurement of 1 jug of seawater.

Wheress the method going with this?
We need to understand a weight measurement to measure the mass of anything.
Balancing a mass with a jug of water is not going to measure all mass.

By all means keep going.

Keep going what?
No.
You keep going.
Youre the one who supposedly had a point.

All mass as in all the mass in the universe/ under the dome?
Theoretically i can create a balance scale infinitly large and can weigh anything.

You still havent made any point.
Don't worry about it, it'll just gnaw at you.

?

Themightykabool

  • 13117
  • +58/-80
Re: Den Pressure - A Definable Hypothesis & Experiments (Scepti, iWitness)
« Reply #3310 on: January 20, 2019, 06:16:17 AM »


Why is there an extreme low pressure?
You take a cup.
Fill it with water.
Put a card paper on top.
No mechanical pumpinh.
Flip the cup over fast.
The water seals and stays in the cup.
Pressure never changed.
When you start to understand the atmosphere above you and how it's all stacked, you'll understand why you can reduce the pressure of that atmosphere from working against you to push things down.
It also disproves the fictional spouted gravity stone dead...but that should become obvious to those that pay attention.

Anyway, once you stop the upper atmosphere from pushing down on the water in the cup, you only leave whatever atmosphere is trapped in that cup or none as you say.
It means that the lower atmospheric stack below the card can easily resist the water inside that cup, along with the card itself.
This is achieved because you create the force that pushes back the atmosphere above along with your upturned cup.

If you cannot compress into the atmosphere it cannot compress back.
The cup prevents this, so even with a small amount of atmosphere trapped in the cup of water, the water is only pushed on by a small amount,
That small amount of trapped atmosphere is pushing against the inner top of the cup and using that as it's leverage and also the water as it's leverage.
A bit like a tiny Samson trying to push pillars apart but not being strong enough to do so.

Add more air and you add more compression which will push out the water and overcome the resisting lower stack.

Good thought.
You realise you just debunked your theory?

As mentioned time and time again.

If the cup is able to block upper atmosphere, then pressure vessels exist.
An object weighed inside a pressure vessel that has been evacuated of its air, will weigh less.
But in fact, it doesnt.
Which goes in line with you above statement and observed reality.

?

Themightykabool

  • 13117
  • +58/-80
Re: Den Pressure - A Definable Hypothesis & Experiments (Scepti, iWitness)
« Reply #3311 on: January 20, 2019, 06:17:24 AM »
Also.
No gravity mentioned.
I dont use gravity.
I use "predictive fall" pushing objects down under the denP model.

?

Themightykabool

  • 13117
  • +58/-80
Re: Den Pressure - A Definable Hypothesis & Experiments (Scepti, iWitness)
« Reply #3312 on: January 20, 2019, 06:19:33 AM »
Why are we on an island measuring rocks with jugs of water?
The question was to sobchak.
The question was:
You are on the island with nothing. You can invent anything you want to but you have to know what you are inventing to solve issues because the litre and everything else does not exist. Nothing exists other than the food and water the island provides, plus the necessary stuff to manufacture whatever you can aid you to move forward.

In this case we need to find out how much the rock weighs on that beach.
What do you invent to start that off so we can understand weight?

I know we're going way off track here but there's a method in my asking, as you are aware.

Right.
We covered this portion.
Newly invented measurement of 1 jug of seawater.

Wheress the method going with this?
We need to understand a weight measurement to measure the mass of anything.
Balancing a mass with a jug of water is not going to measure all mass.

By all means keep going.

Keep going what?
No.
You keep going.
Youre the one who supposedly had a point.

All mass as in all the mass in the universe/ under the dome?
Theoretically i can create a balance scale infinitly large and can weigh anything.

You still havent made any point.
Don't worry about it, it'll just gnaw at you.

You said you had a point.
10pg later you still havent made one.
Thanks for the troll.

*

sceptimatic

  • Flat Earth Scientist
  • 30076
  • +3/-4
Re: Den Pressure - A Definable Hypothesis & Experiments (Scepti, iWitness)
« Reply #3313 on: January 20, 2019, 06:24:31 AM »
Good thought.
You realise you just debunked your theory?

As mentioned time and time again.

If the cup is able to block upper atmosphere, then pressure vessels exist.
Who said pressure vessels don't exist?

Quote from: Themightykabool
An object weighed inside a pressure vessel that has been evacuated of its air, will weigh less.
But in fact, it doesnt.
Which goes in line with you above statement and observed reality.
That vessel is evacuated of it's air by being replaced by denser fluid. If you can't grasp this then you're not only taking one step back you're sprinting back to a place where there's no hope of you understanding.

*

sceptimatic

  • Flat Earth Scientist
  • 30076
  • +3/-4
Re: Den Pressure - A Definable Hypothesis & Experiments (Scepti, iWitness)
« Reply #3314 on: January 20, 2019, 06:25:39 AM »
Also.
No gravity mentioned.
I dont use gravity.
I use "predictive fall" pushing objects down under the denP model.
You can't use anything under the denpressure model if you don't know the denpressure model.

?

Themightykabool

  • 13117
  • +58/-80
Re: Den Pressure - A Definable Hypothesis & Experiments (Scepti, iWitness)
« Reply #3315 on: January 20, 2019, 06:36:09 AM »
Good thought.
You realise you just debunked your theory?

As mentioned time and time again.

If the cup is able to block upper atmosphere, then pressure vessels exist.
Who said pressure vessels don't exist?

Quote from: Themightykabool
An object weighed inside a pressure vessel that has been evacuated of its air, will weigh less.
But in fact, it doesnt.
Which goes in line with you above statement and observed reality.
That vessel is evacuated of it's air by being replaced by denser fluid. If you can't grasp this then you're not only taking one step back you're sprinting back to a place where there's no hope of you understanding.

No fluid.
Nearly no air.

?

Themightykabool

  • 13117
  • +58/-80
Re: Den Pressure - A Definable Hypothesis & Experiments (Scepti, iWitness)
« Reply #3316 on: January 20, 2019, 06:37:32 AM »
Also.
No gravity mentioned.
I dont use gravity.
I use "predictive fall" pushing objects down under the denP model.
You can't use anything under the denpressure model if you don't know the denpressure model.

In terms of "why things fall" i dont use gravity so you can quit that copout.

?

Lonegranger

  • 4083
  • +0/-0
Re: Den Pressure - A Definable Hypothesis & Experiments (Scepti, iWitness)
« Reply #3317 on: January 20, 2019, 06:39:38 AM »


Why is there an extreme low pressure?
You take a cup.
Fill it with water.
Put a card paper on top.
No mechanical pumpinh.
Flip the cup over fast.
The water seals and stays in the cup.
Pressure never changed.
When you start to understand the atmosphere above you and how it's all stacked, you'll understand why you can reduce the pressure of that atmosphere from working against you to push things down.
It also disproves the fictional spouted gravity stone dead...but that should become obvious to those that pay attention.

Anyway, once you stop the upper atmosphere from pushing down on the water in the cup, you only leave whatever atmosphere is trapped in that cup or none as you say.
It means that the lower atmospheric stack below the card can easily resist the water inside that cup, along with the card itself.
This is achieved because you create the force that pushes back the atmosphere above along with your upturned cup.

If you cannot compress into the atmosphere it cannot compress back.
The cup prevents this, so even with a small amount of atmosphere trapped in the cup of water, the water is only pushed on by a small amount,
That small amount of trapped atmosphere is pushing against the inner top of the cup and using that as it's leverage and also the water as it's leverage.
A bit like a tiny Samson trying to push pillars apart but not being strong enough to do so.

Add more air and you add more compression which will push out the water and overcome the resisting lower stack.

How do you know about the upper atmosphere? have you been there? How can you comment on things you have no direct experience of?

*

JimmyTheCrab

  • 10340
  • +0/-5
Re: Den Pressure - A Definable Hypothesis & Experiments (Scepti, iWitness)
« Reply #3318 on: January 20, 2019, 08:06:20 AM »

How do you know about the upper atmosphere? have you been there? How can you comment on things you have no direct experience of?
Logic and common sense.  Apparently.
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.

?

Lonegranger

  • 4083
  • +0/-0
Re: Den Pressure - A Definable Hypothesis & Experiments (Scepti, iWitness)
« Reply #3319 on: January 20, 2019, 11:37:01 AM »

How do you know about the upper atmosphere? have you been there? How can you comment on things you have no direct experience of?
Logic and common sense.  Apparently.

nah that what he wants you to think..... Jim Crab.... I think is more likely more made up doo doos!

?

sobchak

  • 449
  • +0/-0
Re: Den Pressure - A Definable Hypothesis & Experiments (Scepti, iWitness)
« Reply #3320 on: January 20, 2019, 11:40:21 AM »
As I understand from your descriptions of your conceptual model, a pressurized container has no stacking.

Is there a downward force on an object suspended in a pressurized container in your conceptual model?

That depends on the container.

If you have a perfect sphere and pressurise it then you have no stacking. It's equal.

Anything perfectly symmetrical and pressurised would be the same.

Change anything at all inside that object that upsets that and you create an unequal force.

So in your model a symmetrical pressurized vessel has equal pressure everywhere.

But a non symmetrical one will not?

Can you explain how this happens using the basics of your model?

*

JackBlack

  • 26157
  • +51/-79
Re: Den Pressure - A massive pile of self contradictory nonsense.
« Reply #3321 on: January 20, 2019, 12:28:13 PM »
That depends on the container.
Let me put this in a simple way...as I tried to do earlier.
If you have a perfect sphere and pressurise it then you have no stacking. It's equal.
Why should the symmetry of the container matter?
Here is your prior claim:
In the container you are not stacking naturally. You are forcing a compression by trapping it inside the container. Therefore there is no natural stacking. It uniform, like you say.
With the Earth dome there is natural stacking and it isn't uniform.
You made no appeals to the shape of the container and said that by trapping air inside it you make it so there is no natural stacking and thus it is uniform.
Why completely change that and pretend it only happens to spherical containers with nothing inside?
Is it because you realise it just refuted your model, so now you need to patch it?

So good job contradicting yourself and refuting your model yet again.

It doesn't push up as such. It resists by pushing against the atmospheric stack that is using each stack under it to use as a leverage
So it doesn't push up, but it pushes up?
It doesn't matter if you want to label the push up as resistance, it is still pushing up.

I know we're going way off track here but there's a method in my asking, as you are aware.
There really doesn't seem to be.
Yes, we need to establish a system of units to be able to quantity how much something weighs.


The stack of atmosphere under the water is far greater a resistance to it because it is not up against the upper atmosphere pushing that water down.
Again, the card doesn't just cover the water. It extends over the edges and you can do it with a wide variety of cards and glasses.
Again, it doesn't matter what resistance there is unless that resistance is really an upwards force. Without an upwards force to counter the downwards force of the stack above, the card would be pushed down.

along with the extreme low pressure inside that cup
Which is completely irrelevant unless the atmosphere below pushes up.
So going to admit the atmosphere below pushes up?

If so, you are back to not having an explanation for why things fall.
If not, then you have no explanation for why the card doesn't fall.

We need to understand a weight measurement to measure the mass of anything.
No we don't.
Just because you can only think of determining mass based upon weight doesn't mean everyone is like that.
Mass can be measured independent of weight.

It also disproves the fictional spouted gravity stone dead...but that should become obvious to those that pay attention.
No, what is obvious to everyone paying attention is that your model is complete garbage unable to explain even the simplest things like why do things fall. Any attempt at an explanation is easily destroyed by even a small amount of thinking about it, or experiments which are quite easy to do.
It is also obvious that you are only bringing up gravity like that to pretend there is no alternative, even though you are yet to show a single problem with gravity. But like I said, if you want to discuss gravity, do it in another thread.

Anyway, once you stop the upper atmosphere from pushing down on the water in the cup
Focus on the card first.
The card extends beyond the cup and thus the atmosphere is still pushing down on it.

The cup prevents this, so even with a small amount of atmosphere trapped in the cup of water, the water is only pushed on by a small amount,
And this small push, without a push from below, is enough to move the object.

If you want to focus on the water, then we can see that your explanation still fails. Take the card away and the water falls.

That vessel is evacuated of it's air by being replaced by denser fluid.
Well that's the first time I have seen you bring up this pile of garbage.
Just what makes you think that?
You have previously (mostly) accepted how evacuation of such a vessel works:
You have a chamber effectively sealed from outside, but open to the inside. You make this a low pressure region which results in the pressure equalising and thus the air flowing from the vessel to the chamber. Then you switch the seals and have it open to the outside, and then compress it making it a high pressure region which pushes the air out.
Where does this magic denser fluid come in?

If you can't grasp this then you're not only taking one step back you're sprinting back to a place where there's no hope of you understanding.
So if people don't just baselessly accept your garbage you just repeatedly insult them?

*

sceptimatic

  • Flat Earth Scientist
  • 30076
  • +3/-4
Re: Den Pressure - A Definable Hypothesis & Experiments (Scepti, iWitness)
« Reply #3322 on: January 20, 2019, 02:28:37 PM »
As I understand from your descriptions of your conceptual model, a pressurized container has no stacking.

Is there a downward force on an object suspended in a pressurized container in your conceptual model?

That depends on the container.

If you have a perfect sphere and pressurise it then you have no stacking. It's equal.

Anything perfectly symmetrical and pressurised would be the same.

Change anything at all inside that object that upsets that and you create an unequal force.

So in your model a symmetrical pressurized vessel has equal pressure everywhere.

But a non symmetrical one will not?

Can you explain how this happens using the basics of your model?
Let's take a pyramid shape and pressurise it.

Along the bottom you have more molecules than above with each stack, all the way to the very top where you would have very little amount of molecules.

Think of it like people making a pyramid.
Let's say we start off with 10 people along the ground.
Now we add people on top to stand between two people underneath, all along.
Then the same again on top of them and so on until there's 1 person at the very top.

Who's under the most pressure and what exactly are they doing to ensure they hold up the rest?
Who is under the least pressure?

*

sceptimatic

  • Flat Earth Scientist
  • 30076
  • +3/-4
Re: Den Pressure - A massive pile of self contradictory nonsense.
« Reply #3323 on: January 20, 2019, 02:43:35 PM »

The card extends beyond the cup and thus the atmosphere is still pushing down on it.

And it's being resisted under it with much more area due to the cup taking up that extra area with little atmospheric compression pushing down on it.

Take some time to understand it.

*

JackBlack

  • 26157
  • +51/-79
Re: Den Pressure - A Definable Hypothesis & Experiments (Scepti, iWitness)
« Reply #3324 on: January 20, 2019, 03:04:17 PM »
Let's take a pyramid shape and pressurise it.
Along the bottom you have more molecules than above with each stack, all the way to the very top where you would have very little amount of molecules.
Why should this only apply to a pyramid?
Why not a sphere as well?
Sure, you might not have more molecules than above, but they occupy a smaller area and thus would be more densely packed.
Unless you are claiming the pyramid is at a constant pressure and thus the stacking is due entirely to the number of molecules?
But in that case you have fewest molecules at the bottom and top of a sphere, and the most in the middle.
That would mean that the only shapes which don't stack are prisms (and cylinders if you don't count them as prisms).

Who's under the most pressure and what exactly are they doing to ensure they hold up the rest?
In denpressure or reality?
In denpressure, with nothing yet provided to give any reason for them to be pushed down, they would't be under any pressure.

And it's being resisted under it with much more area due to the cup taking up that extra area with little atmospheric compression pushing down on it.

Take some time to understand it.
Follow your own advice and take some time to actually understand rather than just trying to come up with excuses.
Unless that resistance is a push (which means you need to admit it is pushed up from below), the card should move down.
It doesn't matter how little atmosphere you have above it, if this atmosphere pushes it down and there is nothing below pushing it up, it will go down.

I have taken the time to understand it, and realise your model contradicts itself.
You need it pushing up to stop the card going down, but reject the idea of it pushing up.

?

Themightykabool

  • 13117
  • +58/-80
Re: Den Pressure - A Definable Hypothesis & Experiments (Scepti, iWitness)
« Reply #3325 on: January 20, 2019, 05:24:52 PM »
Still very curious why sobchak and myself are weighing rocks on an island.
Aside from my annoyingness, Did sob recieve a reason?

*

sceptimatic

  • Flat Earth Scientist
  • 30076
  • +3/-4
Re: Den Pressure - A Definable Hypothesis & Experiments (Scepti, iWitness)
« Reply #3326 on: January 20, 2019, 11:40:27 PM »
Unless that resistance is a push (which means you need to admit it is pushed up from below), the card should move down.
I already told you time and time agains it's a push on push.
What you're not grasping is the push from a stack on the up against a suspended object, is a resistance to a pressure push from the surface area of the underside of the object.
Basically speaking it's not really pushing in the energy sense of the word, it's resisting by a small amount which is almost nothing in that scenario. But yes, I can certainly go along with you if you want to mention a push.
I've never denied a push on push, push on resistance wither way.
The issue is in the scenarios presented, as in, The suspended object as a solid, the object dropped into the stack or a suspended mass holding a low pressure being resisted by the stack in  a higher push on push.

It's all about understanding how it all works to create what happens in it, which accounts for absolutely everything we do, with no other magical ingredients.
Quote from: JackBlack
It doesn't matter how little atmosphere you have above it, if this atmosphere pushes it down and there is nothing below pushing it up, it will go down.
But there is something below it. A pressurised stack that will sit under the object if suspended with a light push of the top molecules mildly resisting the surface against the molecules below as a mild leverage.
Or in the case of something being pushed into that stack below, it gets compressed by that above push and can not do anything other than friction grip and compress by the superior amount of atmosphere above and the compression of the displaced atmosphere the object created, extra, above.

Quote from: JackBlack
I have taken the time to understand it, and realise your model contradicts itself.
You need it pushing up to stop the card going down, but reject the idea of it pushing up.
No. If anything I may not explain it in a way you like but you're as much to blame for that by intentionally trying to have me reply to all kinds of mix and match stuff, which I'm fairly sure is deliberate.


But I'm ok with that. I can deal with that.
You'll have to deal with the aftermath you create with your sometimes unmanageable quoted posts that merely pick out half a sentence and argue it.
You only have yourself to blame.

?

Themightykabool

  • 13117
  • +58/-80
Re: Den Pressure - A Definable Hypothesis & Experiments (Scepti, iWitness)
« Reply #3327 on: January 21, 2019, 12:41:31 AM »
Thars right.
Its your fault jackb.
Making him having to connect different aspects of measurabke reality together .
Sheesh.

*

sceptimatic

  • Flat Earth Scientist
  • 30076
  • +3/-4
Re: Den Pressure - A Definable Hypothesis & Experiments (Scepti, iWitness)
« Reply #3328 on: January 21, 2019, 12:48:56 AM »
Thars right.
Its your fault jackb.
Making him having to connect different aspects of measurabke reality together .
Sheesh.
Blurring the lines seems to be the issue with you people.
There's a reason why I keep having to start at the beginning.
I often think, " can they really start to get it and then lose it all in a matter of posts.
I don't believe so but I do believe understanding it and accepting its understood will start to scupper the mainstream created fantasies.

?

Themightykabool

  • 13117
  • +58/-80
Re: Den Pressure - A Definable Hypothesis & Experiments (Scepti, iWitness)
« Reply #3329 on: January 21, 2019, 12:55:37 AM »
Maybe we need to start with basics.
Lets take it back.
Why are we weighing rocks with jugs