Anyone care to do the experiments under my instructions?
I know babymonkey has refused, so I'm wondering if anyone would like to tried it my way.
No problem if nobody does but it would give a good insight into what's really happening.
The reality is that density/mass displaces atmosphere. It also displaces water the same way...AS LONG AS IT'S ALLOWED TO BE ALLOWED TO FIND IT'S OWN BUOYANCY LEVEL.
The buoyancy level is dependent on how much trapped air the water CANNOT crush/squeeze.
Putting dense mass inside a container of sealed atmosphere and creating a false bottom to arrest it's fall is dishonest or at best, naive of anyone doing so.
What false bottom?
Let me make this clear because you've accused me of dishonesty several times now: both those videos are exactly as shown. Nothing has been fiddled with, or modified, or faked. The equipment was what I had lying around.
But here's the key.
The dupe by using the jug can easily be seen if it's marked correctly because there will be a very slight difference in displacement between the two dense masses placed into the container.
To the eye and bad focus, (which babymonkeys was) you will never see the difference because it's minor due to the false bottom arresting the fall of the object, as I mentioned.
I have a better idea: you do it.
If you don't want to do it that's fine. Just stop with the dishonesty, it doesn't impress me.
Again with the dishonesty shit - where is it dishonest?
The videos demonstrate very simply that the amount of water displaced by an object depends on the volume of the object. Density, mass, weight, whatever has got absolutely nothing to do with it. What's dishonest there?
Do your own video if you don't like how other people interpret your gibberish.
Density of an object is what displaces the water. It does this due to atmospheric pressure being displaced against the density of the water itself which pushes the dense object under the water and the more the object is pushed down (squeezed) the more atmosphere is released from the mass until that mass resists the squeeze.
Only then will you get a true reading of the entire density of that mass.
If an object cannot push against the atmosphere due to it being less dense, it will float and displace less water.
I honestly thought you couldn't get any more delusional. I stand corrected.
Of course an object floating on water is going to displace less water than one that is submerged. Who has even remotely suggested anything otherwise? That's nothing but a strawman. Not only that,
that isn't even the argument.
You were shown, on
two occasions, that you're wrong about density determining how much water is displaced. Now you're tap dancing and calling others dishonest for doing a simple demonstration that proves you wrong. The only dishonest person here is you.
It's a testament to how far gone you are. Anything that proves you wrong is incorrect and/or the person who performed the demonstration/experiment is being dishonest. You've had some laughable faux pas' before, but this one is turning into another scepti special.
To wade through your crap, let's just bottom line this:
Describe a demonstration/experiment that can be done with everyday items which will properly demonstrate your claims that it is density that causes displacement and not volume.Since I know you'll never do this yourself and expect others to do it for you (after which you will call them dishonest if the results are contrary to your claims), please just answer the above request as simply and clearly as you can.