Air Pressure vs Gravity

Quote from: sceptimatic on December 15, 2016, 08:39:47 AM

Quote from: Triangles on December 15, 2016, 08:16:15 AM

Quote from: sceptimatic on December 15, 2016, 07:46:04 AM

Quote from: frenat on December 15, 2016, 06:59:38 AM

Quote from: sceptimatic on December 15, 2016, 12:25:02 AM

Quote from: frenat on December 14, 2016, 11:50:14 AM

What did Cavendish measure?

I don't know. What did Cavendish measure?

The attraction of one object to another proportional to their mass.  Since you don't believe in that, what do you think he, and the many people that have repeated and/or improved on his experiment since, measured.

How did he manage to do this and what did it physically verify?
In your own words, simply and clearly if you can.

The Cavendish Experiment was the first experiment to accurately measure the value of the gravitational constant.

Henry Cavendish, in 1787, constructed a balance with four lead balls: two big and two small. The two big balls were suspended on a wire while the two small ones were placed into the frame.

When the system was let go, the two suspended balls twisted slightly as they were attracted to the other lead balls. He used the torsional force in the wire to calculate the value of G, the gravitational constant. He came within 1% of the currently accepted value too, impressive right?

It was performed horizontally to limit the effects of Earth's gravity.

Basically that is what it is, you can read about it more here: Cavendish Experiment

What the hell is that supposed to mean?

The Cavendish experiment was designed to test gravitational energy present in everyday objects. Since he did not want the gravitational pull of Earth to effect his experiment, he suspended the 2 lead balls midair at the exact same height. The energy transferred between the 2 balls caused them to rotate. The force of this rotation was calculated, and the constant g was born.

Couldn't have said it better myself, good sir.

Quote from: markjo on December 14, 2016, 11:52:07 AM

Ummm....  That isn't what I said.  No matter how you stack it, air pressure has no preferred direction of action like gravity does.

Atmospheric pressure acts upon everything and anything in any form and any way.
Gravity is still a made up fictional force (not a force?) no matter how you dress it up.

At least gravity has a lot more practical applications than denpressure does, or ever will.

Quote from: markjo on December 14, 2016, 11:52:07 AM

There are several very complicated explanations for gravity (General Relativity, Quantum Gravity, etc.).  Just because you can't understand them doesn't mean that they aren't there.

What is general relativity in your best simplest kiddified terms?
Also quantum gravity.

No.  If you can't handle an adult conversation about physics, then you have no business trying to reinvent it.

Don't copy and paste a load of complicated nonsense. Just give me the basic nutshell.

Tough luck.  Relativity and Quantum Gravity are very complicated.  Deal with it.

Quote from: markjo on December 14, 2016, 11:52:07 AM

Atmospheric pressure is very real, it just doesn't do everything that you think it does.

It does everything.
We are alive and moving with everything in its place because of it.

Too bad that you don't have any math to support any of that.

Quote from: markjo on December 14, 2016, 11:52:07 AM

  The simple fact of the matter is that the weight of objects don't change when atmospheric pressure changes.

The simple fact is that weight of objects do change when atmospheric pressure changes.
Just remember that weight is nothing more than a man made scale of measurement of any dense matter.

Close, weight is the measure of a mass under acceleration.

Quote from: markjo on December 14, 2016, 11:52:07 AM

  No amount of atmospheric stacking can change that reality.

But atmospheric stacking does change things. It changes the entire make up of Earth all through the man made/thought years.

Not really.  Your atmospheric particles wouldn't know where the bottom of the stack was if gravity didn't pull them down.

Quote from: markjo on December 14, 2016, 11:52:07 AM

Psychoactive drugs are a different story (after all, reality is for people who can't handle drugs).

Probably for another topic but maybe certain drugs can open people's minds to actually see what maybe other drugs are suppressing.
Like I said, another topic.

Yes, we can discuss which drugs inspired denpressure in a different thread.

Quote from: sceptimatic on December 14, 2016, 11:27:40 PM

Quote from: Badxtoss on December 14, 2016, 11:06:04 AM

Scepti, let me see if I understand what you're saying here.  There is a dome covering a flat earth, and sealed inside that dome, among other things, is our air.  It is the pressure from this air that is holding us to the ground.
I know that's probably a little simplified but does that about sum it up?

Perfectly well.

Ok so we are in a pressurized dome.  Why is the air pressure lower the higher up you go?  Shouldn't it be equalized throughout?

Let's hope you try to understand this.
Let's build the dome from the only place it can be built. Bottom up, right?
We don't build buildings top down and we don't stack hay from top down.
This might sound child like and duh, ok scepti but trust me it needs to be understood to understand atmospheric pressure STACKING.

Now imagine a water leak on the ground ...on a flat/flattish ground. Above it is a true vacuum, or what we could only perceive as one.
This water keeps building up all over the Earth and at the edges it freezes against the true vacuum, because it's under little to no agitation by reachable energy after the spread out.

It now starts to build up and against it freezes at the edges due to no reachable energy from the central Earth sun, (another topic) ans so builds a dome which also builds a gaseous atmosphere as the dome builds and builds.
Now all of what's build within is stacked bottom up and each molecule is pushing/resisting against the one above which is resisting/pushing against the one about it and so on and so on.

This eventually creates a massive pressure below which gets less and less as it stacks and even less towards the upper as the dome gets more curved.
Now everything has to grow into that environment and every object/animal or whatever, has to push that atmosphere out of the way in order to grow into it.
Each dense object will displace it's own mass of atmosphere out of the way, which then exerts that pressure right back as a push. So in effect we have a push on push.

If you think of it like being inside a snow globe full of water and assume that you have no air inside you. Then imagine if you were placed inside of it. Your body would displace the water in that snow globe and that water you displaced would be still in there and added to your body as pressure, right?

Understand?

At least gravity has a lot more practical applications than denpressure does, or ever will.

Did you just throw a stone and stamp your foot?
Tell me about this gravity and its more practical applications.
Tell me how it's used and explain how it is.
I don't want to see stuff like " engineers build bridges using gravity" or " gravimeters are used and they wouldn't work without gravity."
I would like you to explain how it is used and the proof that gravity is what's behind it.
I can easily explain my denpressure behind it all and it does not require magic. It only required a genuine deep thinking mind.
I await your respone.
Try not to use me being on drugs as an answer. It only excites your followers but makes you look foolish and weak.

  If you can't handle an adult conversation about physics, then you have no business trying to reinvent it.

When you discuss real physics then we can have an adult conversation.
Parroting what you are fed by protocol is proof of parroting and the ability to memorise.
Use your own brain for your own thought.

Tough luck.  Relativity and Quantum Gravity are very complicated.  Deal with it.

You're really nailing me down with your intellect. You're like the fictional melting witch of the west. You're melting because you're being watered down.

Too bad that you don't have any math to support any of that.

Maths is fine if it's required in life to build and measure and what not.
It's not needed to explain this stuff.

weight is the measure of a mass under acceleration.

Acceleration of mass by what?

Your atmospheric particles wouldn't know where the bottom of the stack was if gravity didn't pull them down.

Would you know if 10 people we stacked on top of you?
Of course you would. And you'd feel that pressure of that upper stack.
Imagine what the person at the very top of that stack feels. Do you reckon he'd be as under pressure as you?
What about the one directly above you?
What about the one directly under the man on top?

Get it now?

Yes, we can discuss which drugs inspired denpressure in a different thread.

Make a thread and try not to weaken yourself in this one. You're already melting like an ice cream in Cyprus.

If you think of it like being inside a snow globe full of water and assume that you have no air inside you. Then imagine if you were placed inside of it. Your body would displace the water in that snow globe and that water you displaced would be still in there and added to your body as pressure, right?

Understand?

Yes, someone completely out of touch with reality could imagine this sort of thing, but it explains nothing at all.
Every time someone comes up with different situation (weight in an almost perfect vacuum, weight at high altitude, weight in a high pressure environment) you trot out a weird explanation that really explains nothing.
Even at sea-level, while average sea-level pressure is 1013.25 mbar, it can vary from a record low of 870 mbar to above 1050 mbar.

But a person's weight does not vary with these changes in atmospheric pressure! And no hand waving or tortured explanation can deny that.

In fact, there is a very small (though negligible) decrease in weight at higher atmospheric pressure.
Not that facts ever bother Sceppy.
By the way, how many explanations do we have for "gravity" in the Flat Earth Society? At least four at last count!  Are they all correct? 

Quote from: Boots on December 13, 2016, 12:34:42 AM

And does not air pressure increase as altitude decreases? This is why I don't understand why air pressure alone would cause an object to fall.

I'm going to give you something to think about and answer. Let's see if you come to the right thought on it and if not, I'll explain, because this is a good way to prove what you're dead against.

Open a tin of solid dog food or something that if formed in the tin with gelatin. Try and bash out the contents after you open the lid.
It's difficult, right?

Ok, now pierce a hole in the other end of the tin and now bash the contents out.
They come out easy. Why?

Answer this and you might start to grasp stuff.

So you enjoy dog food...that's fine.

I'll show you mine if you show me yours...

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gravimetry

It's even ok to misunderstand physics afterall the concepts of air pressure and gravity can be difficult to understand.

Quote from: sceptimatic on December 13, 2016, 01:19:00 AM

Quote from: Boots on December 13, 2016, 12:34:42 AM

And does not air pressure increase as altitude decreases? This is why I don't understand why air pressure alone would cause an object to fall.

I'm going to give you something to think about and answer. Let's see if you come to the right thought on it and if not, I'll explain, because this is a good way to prove what you're dead against.

Open a tin of solid dog food or something that if formed in the tin with gelatin. Try and bash out the contents after you open the lid.
It's difficult, right?

Ok, now pierce a hole in the other end of the tin and now bash the contents out.
They come out easy. Why?

Answer this and you might start to grasp stuff.

So you enjoy dog food...that's fine.

I'll show you mine if you show me yours...

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gravimetry

It's even ok to misunderstand physics afterall the concepts of air pressure and gravity can be difficult to understand.

An instrument used to measure gravity is known as a gravimeter, or gravitometer. Since general relativity regards the effects of gravity as indistinguishable from the effects of acceleration, one can regard gravimeters as special-purpose accelerometers. Many weighing scales may be regarded as simple gravimeters. In one common form, a spring is used to counteract the force of gravity pulling on an object. The change in length of the spring may be calibrated to the force required to balance the gravitational pull. The resulting measurement may be made in units of force (such as the newton), but is more commonly made in units of gals.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gravimetry

404 Argument not found.

No argument bud...what is there to argue about?
I can show you a gravitometer but can you show me a similar device that can measure your version.....whatever it's called ...maybe a flatometer....

That aside you guys crack me up in trying to explain away anything that interferes with your unstable belief systems. If water being wet somehow contradicted your flat earth beliefs you would find a way to prove water was in fact dry and its all part of a conspiracy by some group or other to hide the truth from everyone.

Too bad for you, that gravity does not explain why the universe is expanding! Thats why I dont believe in it. If earth is flat and space does not exist there is no reason to define how physics operate in a mythical environment. Everything is simplified and yet explained just a thoroughly, I belive occams razor applies here in favor of a flat earth.

Can I ask how you know the universe is expanding?

No argument bud...what is there to argue about?
I can show you a gravitometer but can you show me a similar device that can measure your version.....whatever it's called ...maybe a flatometer....

That aside you guys crack me up in trying to explain away anything that interferes with your unstable belief systems. If water being wet somehow contradicted your flat earth beliefs you would find a way to prove water was in fact dry and its all part of a conspiracy by some group or other to hide the truth from everyone.

Nah, it's not a flatometer, it's called weighing scales that weigh how much an object displaces atmosphere.
The pressure reads on a man made scale reading that gives a weight measurement to any dense matter placed upon the scale, whether on a scale plate or a hung scale hook.

Quote from: Badxtoss on December 15, 2016, 12:02:29 PM

Quote from: sceptimatic on December 14, 2016, 11:27:40 PM

Quote from: Badxtoss on December 14, 2016, 11:06:04 AM

Scepti, let me see if I understand what you're saying here.  There is a dome covering a flat earth, and sealed inside that dome, among other things, is our air.  It is the pressure from this air that is holding us to the ground.
I know that's probably a little simplified but does that about sum it up?

Perfectly well.

Ok so we are in a pressurized dome.  Why is the air pressure lower the higher up you go?  Shouldn't it be equalized throughout?

Let's hope you try to understand this.
Let's build the dome from the only place it can be built. Bottom up, right?
We don't build buildings top down and we don't stack hay from top down.

Ahem.

I can show you a gravitometer but can you show me a similar device that can measure your version.....whatever it's called ...maybe a flatometer....

Yes, I call it falldownyness^TM it can be measured with a weight and spring.

a spring is used to counteract the force of falldownyness pulling on an object. The change in length of the spring may be calibrated to the force required to balance the falldownyness force.

Also, angry globularist is angry, I didn't even say anything about a flat earth, I just said you didn't have an argument.

Quote from: markjo on December 15, 2016, 07:31:16 PM

At least gravity has a lot more practical applications than denpressure does, or ever will.

Did you just throw a stone and stamp your foot?
Tell me about this gravity and its more practical applications.
Tell me how it's used and explain how it is.
I don't want to see stuff like " engineers build bridges using gravity" or " gravimeters are used and they wouldn't work without gravity."
I would like you to explain how it is used and the proof that gravity is what's behind it.
I can easily explain my denpressure behind it all and it does not require magic. It only required a genuine deep thinking mind.
I await your respone.

If your denpressure is so useful, then please provide a formula where you use denpressure to determine the weight of a 100 kg mass at an atmospheric pressure of 1.03 kg/cm².

Quote from: markjo on December 15, 2016, 07:31:16 PM

  If you can't handle an adult conversation about physics, then you have no business trying to reinvent it.

When you discuss real physics then we can have an adult conversation.
Parroting what you are fed by protocol is proof of parroting and the ability to memorise.
Use your own brain for your own thought.

Why should I feel the need to reinvent physics when the current physics work just fine?

Quote from: markjo on December 15, 2016, 07:31:16 PM

Tough luck.  Relativity and Quantum Gravity are very complicated.  Deal with it.

You're really nailing me down with your intellect. You're like the fictional melting witch of the west. You're melting because you're being watered down.

Quote from: markjo on December 15, 2016, 07:31:16 PM

Too bad that you don't have any math to support any of that.

Maths is fine if it's required in life to build and measure and what not.
It's not needed to explain this stuff.

Actually, math is needed to explain this stuff.  Math is how you bring your "theory" into the real world of practical application.

Remember all of those arguments about how everything should be flying off of the equator because it's spinning at 1000 mph?  Well, when you do the math, you find that the effects are actually very small, as can be verified experimentally.

What experiments have you performed to verify denpressure?

Quote from: markjo on December 15, 2016, 07:31:16 PM

weight is the measure of a mass under acceleration.

Acceleration of mass by what?

Doesn't matter.  Gravity, rockets, elevators, cars, roller coasters, centrifuge, whatever.

Quote from: markjo on December 15, 2016, 07:31:16 PM

Your atmospheric particles wouldn't know where the bottom of the stack was if gravity didn't pull them down.

Would you know if 10 people we stacked on top of you?
Of course you would. And you'd feel that pressure of that upper stack.

Yes, because gravity is pulling the stack down on top of me.

What would happen if the stack was in a vacuum?  Would it still weigh as much?

Quote from: markjo on December 15, 2016, 07:31:16 PM

  If you can't handle an adult conversation about physics, then you have no business trying to reinvent it.

When you discuss real physics then we can have an adult conversation.
Parroting what you are fed by protocol is proof of parroting and the ability to memorise.
Use your own brain for your own thought.

Why should I feel the need to reinvent physics when the current physics work just fine?

Does it work just fine? If gravity attracts all mass, why is the universe expanding? You cannot answer that, yet still believe that gravity is a perfect explanation? Hypocrisy much?

Quote from: sceptimatic on December 16, 2016, 12:18:18 AM

Quote from: markjo on December 15, 2016, 07:31:16 PM

  If you can't handle an adult conversation about physics, then you have no business trying to reinvent it.

When you discuss real physics then we can have an adult conversation.
Parroting what you are fed by protocol is proof of parroting and the ability to memorise.
Use your own brain for your own thought.

Why should I feel the need to reinvent physics when the current physics work just fine?

Does it work just fine? If gravity attracts all mass, why is the universe expanding? You cannot answer that, yet still believe that gravity is a perfect explanation? Hypocrisy much?

Please find anywhere where we said "Gravity is the perfect explanation." We said several times that it is the most sensical and measurable description of gravitation.

The universe is expanding due to dark energy, whose energy density is constant and has high expansion potential, as well as the curvature of spacetime due to gravity as well as general relativity and the mass-energy equivalence. Think about putting gas in a room, it doesn't all collect in a corner due to mutual gravitation.

Considering dark energy has a constant energy density, after the big bang, there was an amount of dark energy, which higher potential for expansion. That expands the universe, which allows for more dark energy, and the cycle continues infinitely.

Think about it in this analogy: if spacetime is a river, gravity is the current. The big bang was the initial "push" that began the river. The rate of the current’s flow depends on how much energy there is in a region of the river: the energy density. Since we know that mass and energy are intimately related, any matter particles in a region will contribute to that energy density, affecting the current, which will in turn affect the motion of the particles.

I know you're going to dismiss it as some sort of witchcraft or some odd term, but whatever.

The universe is expanding due to dark energy, whose energy density is constant and has high expansion potential, as well as the curvature of spacetime due to gravity as well as general relativity and the mass-energy equivalence.

Dark energy huh...? So where did you get your opinion about why its expanding? Because this website here says that dark matter/energy was created after the cosmic expansion and the formation of our galaxy.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_Solar_System_formation_and_evolution_hypotheses

If your denpressure is so useful, then please provide a formula where you use denpressure to determine the weight of a 100 kg mass at an atmospheric pressure of 1.03 kg/cm².

I can't determine the weight of 100kg unless I weigh it to know it's 100kg.

Why should I feel the need to reinvent physics when the current physics work just fine?

But they don't work fine for reality. They work fine because they've been shoehorned into a made up model that does not represent reality.

Actually, math is needed to explain this stuff.  Math is how you bring your "theory" into the real world of practical application.

Nope. Maths is fine for real world calculations. I agree on that.
The maths that is used in many things we are talking about, is shoehorned to fit, as I mentioned, or are used to explain a dupe for reality, as in fictional gravity in place of the reailty of atmospheric pressure upon density/mass.

Remember all of those arguments about how everything should be flying off of the equator because it's spinning at 1000 mph?  Well, when you do the math, you find that the effects are actually very small, as can be verified experimentally.

1038 mph is 1038 mph no matter which way you try to dress it down into something like a ticking clock hand.

What experiments have you performed to verify denpressure?

Quite a few but you people refuse to recognise it because you add fictional gravity into it. It's pathetic when you think about it.
Gravity is unknown and accepted. Atmospheric pressure is known and dismissed unless gravity is added into the mix.
Work that one out all you genuine people.


 

Doesn't matter.  Acceleration of mass by  Gravity, rockets, elevators, cars, roller coasters, centrifuge, whatever.

Tell me how gravity accelerates anything. Just explain how it does it.
Don't just say mass attracts mass. Tell me why a mass is "pulled down?" by more mass.

Yes, because gravity is pulling the stack down on top of me.

As above, explain the scenario I gave with the people.
Tell me how it's done and what the force is, or whatever does it.

What would happen if the stack was in a vacuum?  Would it still weigh as much?

By vacuum I assume you mean lower pressure.
It's a hard one to call unless we actually do the experiment with humans in that environment, because the entire set up changes from dense to less dense matter, as in compression of atmosphere that the people are pushing into.
You see, in the normal stack you have 10 people displacing their own area and density of atmosphere and in a low pressure chamber you would expand the same people and spreading the area due to expansion of their make up/matter/molecules that alter to fit the lower pressure environment that is being created by allowing atmosphere to be evacuated from a chamber.

Now all we need, is scales to see what pressure change there is.
The issue is, it would have to be done by genuine people and we know that will never happen.
Even a kid on here tried to play the duping tricks with small objects.

Quote from: sceptimatic on December 15, 2016, 08:36:52 AM

Quote from: IonSpen on December 15, 2016, 07:56:45 AM

That doesn't make sense at all and you know it. The pressure inside the plane hasn't changed and you're just simply waving  this away.

The pressure inside the plane does change. It changes once the plane accelerates up or down.

Quote from: IonSpen on December 15, 2016, 07:56:45 AM

The pressure outside the plane is much lower than inside. No matter which way the plane is moving, you should be held squarely in your seat, just like if you were driving your car (according to your Denspressure).

You have to look at it all in various ways. There is no one way with energy force, as in any accelerating vehicle.
You say pressure outside the plane is much lower than inside. How exactly do you work this out?
I'm not asking for maths calculations, I'm asking you to explain what's happening outside and inside.
I need to know this so I know what I'm dealing with, with you.

Quote from: IonSpen on December 15, 2016, 07:56:45 AM

Pressure overcoming pressure? The pressure inside the plane never changes so therefore your Denspressure is debunked..

As I mentioned above. The pressure does change. It only stays constant when the plane is moving at a constant speed.

Quote from: IonSpen on December 15, 2016, 07:56:45 AM

Now please don't spin this around and tell me I'm brainwashed, indoctrinated, etc because of gravity. I have never mentioned gravity (til now) so there's no need to even bring it up. Denspressure is the topic

I'm not spinning anything.
Oh and the topic is AIR PRESSURE VERSES GRAVITY.
This means that your gravity has to be explained as well.
I don't want answers like "well Newton sort of said something" or " well Cavendish did this test thing" or " we don't need to know what it is, we know what it does."

You know, cack like that.

Right, but I'm only interested in the pressure side of it for now.
Air pressure outside the plane is lower than air pressure inside because it's at a higher altitude, where the air is thinner. It's measured in pounds per square inch, or psi. Think of it like an air compressor with a tank. Most everyone either has one, or knows how they work at least. The air is pumped inside the sealed tank, compressing it, and holding it with valves. So the pressure is greater inside the tank than outside. Same as the plane at altitude, same mechanics in fact. The only way to change the pressure inside the tank (or plane) is to either add more air or release it. That pressure doesn't change. Right? Right. OK, so back to the plane at altitude. No air is added or released, it stays the same. And you say that is what holds you to your seat. During parabola, you float out of your seat, mind you the air pressure hasn't changed. And you say -
As I mentioned above. The pressure does change. It only stays constant when the plane is moving at a constant speed.
But I'm telling you that the pressure CANNOT change unless MORE AIR is pumped into the cabin (think back to the air compressor/tank) (you could decrease the size of the cabin, effectively increasing the pressure, but for the sake of argument we're not using this option, alternatively you can heat the air as well for +psi). You want higher air pressure, you must add more air. That's just fact. There are gauges that measure psi. During parabola, lift off, or descent, you would see the needle move drastically if it were enough to raise you from your seat, or push you back into your seat during take off. And we know doesn't happen.
Now I suppose it's your turn to tell me how pressure changes inside a sealed vessel without the aforementioned ways - heating, volume compression, and addition of more air.

Scepti, I answered your questions. Can I have your reply to what I've said here? I don't want this to get buried and forgotten. I believe there's a critical flaw in your pressure theory, and my reference to the air compressor and tank expose that flaw.
Thanks..

Scepti, I answered your questions. Can I have your reply to what I've said here? I don't want this to get buried and forgotten. I believe there's a critical flaw in your pressure theory, and my reference to the air compressor and tank expose that flaw.

Missed it, sorry.

Right, but I'm only interested in the pressure side of it for now.
Air pressure outside the plane is lower than air pressure inside because it's at a higher altitude, where the air is thinner. It's measured in pounds per square inch, or psi. Think of it like an air compressor with a tank. Most everyone either has one, or knows how they work at least. The air is pumped inside the sealed tank, compressing it, and holding it with valves. So the pressure is greater inside the tank than outside. Same as the plane at altitude, same mechanics in fact. The only way to change the pressure inside the tank (or plane) is to either add more air or release it. That pressure doesn't change. Right? Right. OK, so back to the plane at altitude. No air is added or released, it stays the same. And you say that is what holds you to your seat. During parabola, you float out of your seat, mind you the air pressure hasn't changed. And you say -
As I mentioned above. The pressure does change. It only stays constant when the plane is moving at a constant speed.
But I'm telling you that the pressure CANNOT change unless MORE AIR is pumped into the cabin (think back to the air compressor/tank) (you could decrease the size of the cabin, effectively increasing the pressure, but for the sake of argument we're not using this option, alternatively you can heat the air as well for +psi). You want higher air pressure, you must add more air. That's just fact. There are gauges that measure psi. During parabola, lift off, or descent, you would see the needle move drastically if it were enough to raise you from your seat, or push you back into your seat during take off. And we know doesn't happen.
Now I suppose it's your turn to tell me how pressure changes inside a sealed vessel without the aforementioned ways - heating, volume compression, and addition of more air.


Thanks..

Ok, first of all a compressed air tank on the ground would be under enormous psi of pressure , depending on the size of the tank and also, it's stationary.

A plane is a pressurised cylinder flying at X amount of thousands of feet at X amount of speed.
You know the air pressure changes because your ears tell you it does.

Now think about this.
You've heard of the slosh effect with water and you know it happens with atmosphere, right?

Let's take the plane as an instance.
When the plane takes off, it's like a compressed air cylinder with wings, only under much less pressure over the area.
As it accelerates, all that air starts to compress from front to back.
This will continue to happen whilst the plane accelerates and you feel this extra pressure upon your body.
Each time it's happening, your body is sort of acclimatising to each push of compressed atmosphere inside the plane.
Once the plane levels out and also stays at a constant speed, you feel a sort of mild pressure release as the compressed air inside the plane equalises. Levels out over the area again.

Now think about this.
If I was to place you inside a super strong see through chamber and started to compress the air into it with you in it, I'm accelerating air into the chamber and it's acting like the plane on acceleration. Pushing the air onto you and compressing you.
If I carry on doing it, your face will start to distort, as will your body as it gets squeezed.
Basically your guts and eyes and what not would pop out in short order.


Can you see what I'm trying to say?

Yeah, if I'm in a sealed chamber and you increase the pressure, the ONLY way you can achieve that is by adding more air.
When the plane accelerates, no air is added. It's not a convertible. Everything inside the plane is moving as fast as the plane itself, including the air. The pilot feels the push back in his seat as much as the passenger in the rear seat.
You cannot compress without adding more. It's that simple. Do you see what I'm saying?

Yeah, if I'm in a sealed chamber and you increase the pressure, the ONLY way you can achieve that is by adding more air.

Yep and that's what happens in planes. They aren't as sealed as a compressed air cylinder. It has to circulate air and change pressures as it gains lift and acceleration.
You don't feel air rushing past your head in a accelerating car but you feel the pressure build and you know the car is not a sealed unit.

When the plane accelerates, no air is added.

Yes there is.

It's not a convertible. Everything inside the plane is moving as fast as the plane itself, including the air.

Yep, in a fashion it is.

The pilot feels the push back in his seat as much as the passenger in the rear seat.
You cannot compress without adding more. It's that simple. Do you see what I'm saying?

I know what you're saying but you are wrong about the plane.
The pilot is pushed back because the air compresses from front to back and the lower pressure left at the front is immediately filled to equalise and will continue to do so until the plane stops accelerating.
Then it will keep a fairly steady pressure, until deceleration or increased acceleration, either on a level or up or down.

Quote from: Badxtoss on December 15, 2016, 12:02:29 PM

Quote from: sceptimatic on December 14, 2016, 11:27:40 PM

Quote from: Badxtoss on December 14, 2016, 11:06:04 AM

Scepti, let me see if I understand what you're saying here.  There is a dome covering a flat earth, and sealed inside that dome, among other things, is our air.  It is the pressure from this air that is holding us to the ground.
I know that's probably a little simplified but does that about sum it up?

Perfectly well.

Ok so we are in a pressurized dome.  Why is the air pressure lower the higher up you go?  Shouldn't it be equalized throughout?

Let's hope you try to understand this.
Let's build the dome from the only place it can be built. Bottom up, right?
We don't build buildings top down and we don't stack hay from top down.
This might sound child like and duh, ok scepti but trust me it needs to be understood to understand atmospheric pressure STACKING.

Now imagine a water leak on the ground ...on a flat/flattish ground. Above it is a true vacuum, or what we could only perceive as one.
This water keeps building up all over the Earth and at the edges it freezes against the true vacuum, because it's under little to no agitation by reachable energy after the spread out.

It now starts to build up and against it freezes at the edges due to no reachable energy from the central Earth sun, (another topic) ans so builds a dome which also builds a gaseous atmosphere as the dome builds and builds.
Now all of what's build within is stacked bottom up and each molecule is pushing/resisting against the one above which is resisting/pushing against the one about it and so on and so on.

This eventually creates a massive pressure below which gets less and less as it stacks and even less towards the upper as the dome gets more curved.
Now everything has to grow into that environment and every object/animal or whatever, has to push that atmosphere out of the way in order to grow into it.
Each dense object will displace it's own mass of atmosphere out of the way, which then exerts that pressure right back as a push. So in effect we have a push on push.

If you think of it like being inside a snow globe full of water and assume that you have no air inside you. Then imagine if you were placed inside of it. Your body would displace the water in that snow globe and that water you displaced would be still in there and added to your body as pressure, right?

Understand?

But I see no reason for the stacking unless you have some force pushing downward towards the ground.  The gas would simply equalize itself in such a closed system.  Don't gases always flow from higher concentration to lower concentration?
In your example of the snow globe, for instance, yes my displacement would add to the pressure, but the pressure would go up throughout the entire system, not just at the bottom.  And I would feel it evenly around my body, not simply pushing down.
Also, I often travel from sea level to much higher elevations, 7000 to 8000 ft.  The air pressure is significantly less at those elevations but I do no weigh significantly less when I am there.

Quote from: sceptimatic on December 16, 2016, 12:18:18 AM

Quote from: markjo on December 15, 2016, 07:31:16 PM

  If you can't handle an adult conversation about physics, then you have no business trying to reinvent it.

When you discuss real physics then we can have an adult conversation.
Parroting what you are fed by protocol is proof of parroting and the ability to memorise.
Use your own brain for your own thought.

Why should I feel the need to reinvent physics when the current physics work just fine?

Does it work just fine? If gravity attracts all mass, why is the universe expanding? You cannot answer that, yet still believe that gravity is a perfect explanation? Hypocrisy much?

Tell you what.  When you come up with a theory that explains gravitational effects on a flat earth as well as Newtonian gravity can on a round earth, then you can talk smack about an expanding universe.  Till then, STFU and get to researching.

Quote from: Triangles on December 16, 2016, 07:49:39 AM

The universe is expanding due to dark energy, whose energy density is constant and has high expansion potential, as well as the curvature of spacetime due to gravity as well as general relativity and the mass-energy equivalence.

Dark energy huh...? So where did you get your opinion about why its expanding? Because this website here says that dark matter/energy was created after the cosmic expansion and the formation of our galaxy.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_Solar_System_formation_and_evolution_hypotheses

The original expansion was from the big bang, "the push". If you look above the "formation of dark energy" on that chart, you will see "cosmic speedup", which is the acceleration which you were asking about earlier.

If you're going to quote something, read it fully first.

Quote from: markjo on December 16, 2016, 06:55:05 AM

If your denpressure is so useful, then please provide a formula where you use denpressure to determine the weight of a 100 kg mass at an atmospheric pressure of 1.03 kg/cm².

I can't determine the weight of 100kg unless I weigh it to know it's 100kg.

Well, then your theory is pretty damned useless, isn't it?  All I have to do is to multiply mass by acceleration and I will know the weight.  Weighing it will only confirm what I already calculated. 

Quote from: markjo on December 16, 2016, 06:55:05 AM

Why should I feel the need to reinvent physics when the current physics work just fine?

But they don't work fine for reality. They work fine because they've been shoehorned into a made up model that does not represent reality.

What part of the model doesn't represent reality?

Quote from: markjo on December 16, 2016, 06:55:05 AM

Actually, math is needed to explain this stuff.  Math is how you bring your "theory" into the real world of practical application.

Nope. Maths is fine for real world calculations. I agree on that.
The maths that is used in many things we are talking about, is shoehorned to fit, as I mentioned, or are used to explain a dupe for reality, as in fictional gravity in place of the reailty of atmospheric pressure upon density/mass.

There are lots of maths used for atmospheric pressure, density and mass that work just fine.  If those maths were shoehorned to fit, then you shouldn't have any trouble coming up with some denpressure maths that don't need to be shoehorned to represent reality.

Quote from: markjo on December 16, 2016, 06:55:05 AM

Remember all of those arguments about how everything should be flying off of the equator because it's spinning at 1000 mph?  Well, when you do the math, you find that the effects are actually very small, as can be verified experimentally.

1038 mph is 1038 mph no matter which way you try to dress it down into something like a ticking clock hand.

So I guess that angular velocity and linear velocity are two more things that have been shoehorned into RET.

Quote from: markjo on December 16, 2016, 06:55:05 AM

What experiments have you performed to verify denpressure?

Quite a few but you people refuse to recognise it because you add fictional gravity into it. It's pathetic when you think about it.

Granted, I don't keep up with all of your denpressure threads, but I don't recall ever seeing anything more than thought experiments from you.  Why haven't you just put a weight on a scale in a vacuum chamber (a simple bell jar would suffice) and see if atmospheric pressure makes any difference as you claim that it should?

Gravity is unknown and accepted. Atmospheric pressure is known and dismissed unless gravity is added into the mix.
Work that one out all you genuine people.

I'm not sure what you mean by "gravity is unknown".  Gravity is known, just not fully understood.  There is a difference.

Quote from: markjo on December 16, 2016, 06:55:05 AM

Doesn't matter.  Acceleration of mass by  Gravity, rockets, elevators, cars, roller coasters, centrifuge, whatever.

Tell me how gravity accelerates anything. Just explain how it does it.
Don't just say mass attracts mass. Tell me why a mass is "pulled down?" by more mass.

According to General Relativity, mass warps space-time in such a way that it creates what is referred to as a "gravity well".  As less massive objects (which have their own smaller gravity wells) approach this gravity well, the tendency is for the smaller object to "fall" into that gravity well.  The gravity well is "deepest" at the center of mass of the larger object, which is why down is towards the center of the earth.

Quote from: markjo on December 16, 2016, 06:55:05 AM

Yes, because gravity is pulling the stack down on top of me.

As above, explain the scenario I gave with the people.
Tell me how it's done and what the force is, or whatever does it.

See above.

Quote from: markjo on December 16, 2016, 06:55:05 AM

What would happen if the stack was in a vacuum?  Would it still weigh as much?

By vacuum I assume you mean lower pressure.
It's a hard one to call unless we actually do the experiment with humans in that environment, because the entire set up changes from dense to less dense matter, as in compression of atmosphere that the people are pushing into.

You see, in the normal stack you have 10 people displacing their own area and density of atmosphere and in a low pressure chamber you would expand the same people and spreading the area due to expansion of their make up/matter/molecules that alter to fit the lower pressure environment that is being created by allowing atmosphere to be evacuated from a chamber.

Now all we need, is scales to see what pressure change there is.
The issue is, it would have to be done by genuine people and we know that will never happen.

  Why do you need to use people?  Why not just use wooden blocks or just about any non-living stackable objects?

Even a kid on here tried to play the duping tricks with small objects.

Since it's your theory, why haven't you done the experiment?

Quote from: Arealhumanbeing on December 16, 2016, 07:29:04 AM

Quote from: sceptimatic on December 16, 2016, 12:18:18 AM

Quote from: markjo on December 15, 2016, 07:31:16 PM

  If you can't handle an adult conversation about physics, then you have no business trying to reinvent it.

When you discuss real physics then we can have an adult conversation.
Parroting what you are fed by protocol is proof of parroting and the ability to memorise.
Use your own brain for your own thought.

Why should I feel the need to reinvent physics when the current physics work just fine?

Does it work just fine? If gravity attracts all mass, why is the universe expanding? You cannot answer that, yet still believe that gravity is a perfect explanation? Hypocrisy much?

Tell you what.  When you come up with a theory that explains gravitational effects on a flat earth as well as Newtonian gravity can on a round earth, then you can talk smack about an expanding universe.  Till then, STFU and get to researching.

I believe thats what this thread is about Markjo. A theory that is just as good as the current theory. You just don't like it, so you say it does not work. Also, Triangles, I was talking about the cosmic EXPANSION not the cosmic speed up, use your eyes - I made a thread just for your magical explanation of the universe expanding, and your incredibly detailed theory on the cause of the big bang if you so wish to say that is the cause of the expansion! Lets leave this thread to poor sceptimatic who is kind enough to answer questions he has answered already, repeatedly, again and again!.

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=68667.0

I believe thats what this thread is about Markjo. A theory that is just as good as the current theory.

You honestly think Denpressure is as good of a theory as the currently accepted one?

Do you even know how the sun and stars are supposed to function in Scepti's alternate model of physics?

Don't make such baseless claims until you actually know what you're talking about.

Would you know if 10 people we stacked on top of you?
Of course you would. And you'd feel that pressure of that upper stack.

You are just refusing to take anything into consideration aren't you?

I have explained this several times, pressure acts uniformly over a surface's entire area.
In your example, the people are all pushing down on one side of you,which isn't analogous to pressure.
As a better analogy, imagine if they were all hugging you very tightly, would you be pushed in any particular direction?

I have also told you that that line of thinking is flawed, that all the air above you pushes down on you, it doesn't.
Fluids push in every direction the same amount.
See Pascal's Law

Pascal's principle is defined as
          A change in pressure at any point in an enclosed fluid at rest is transmitted undiminished to all points in the fluid.

You are just refusing to take anything into consideration aren't you?

Hit the nail on the head. I have been trying to explain the fact that gases work differently than solids for 70 pages in the other thread. If you notice, I actually made the final post on that other thread.

If you confront Scepti with the fact that he has NEVER ONCE observed 1 shred of evidence that his theory could possibly represent reality, he will shut his eyes and ears.

I have resorted to repeating the most laughable part of his "theory," which involves the origin of solar energy.

You demand:

Tell me how gravity accelerates anything. Just explain how it does it.
Don't just say mass attracts mass. Tell me why a mass is "pulled down?" by more mass.

So, you
Tell me how electrostatic charge accelerates anything. Just explain how it does it.
Don't just say charge attracts charge. Tell me why a charge is "attracted" by more charge.
And
Tell me how a magnet accelerates any magnetic material. Just explain how it does it.
Don't just say a magnet attracts magnetic material. Tell me why a magnet is "attracted to" magnetic material.

If you can't do that, Sceppy, then I suggest you just accept gravitation. After all it has been directly measured many, many times.

Denspressure does no let you make any calculations of forces. Maybe you can ignore this and you explain things by waving your hands and saying it is so.
But, I'm afraid that engineers who have to design bridges, cars, aircraft, rockets, etc simply have to make these calculations.

So, shut yourself in your little room and pretend that all these things get designed by magic,