About density and buoyancy that I don't see people bring up.

  • 782 Replies
  • 28353 Views
Re: About density and buoyancy that I don't see people bring up.
« Reply #510 on: October 07, 2017, 08:26:53 AM »
Why does the interior air not move as an equally pressurized whole with the rest of the train car?
It does if the train car is at a steady speed, because the excess pressure is equalised and even though it's marginally more compressed inside the entire car, it creates no added push onto a person in any specific direction and is not severe enough around a person to be mindful of it in terms of identifying it and any excess.
What about when it is not a steady speed?  While accelerating, why doesn't the interior air move as an equally pressurized whole?
Because the vehicle is pushing into atmosphere with more energy and continuously compressing it in one direction which never has the chance to equalise until the vehicle ceases to accelerate.
Yes, you're explaining what happens in this situation in your model, but you're not explaining 'why'. 

Why is the air inside acting that way under acceleration?

*

AltSpace

  • Flat Earth Believer
  • 411
  • Neo-Planarist
Re: About density and buoyancy that I don't see people bring up.
« Reply #511 on: October 08, 2017, 01:24:34 AM »
Sceptimatic,

Buoyancy works in accordance with g (acceleration) and a solid body in liquid, basic formula:


Your 'Denspressure" has all of these except acceleration, what is your explanation for acceleration that's independent of mediums in which masses are displaced?

If you disagree with this, please provide a formula that describes it under your Denspressure idea.

So lets run through the predictions of Denspressure:

1. "Gravity" is just the push of the overlaying atmoplane above us, so air pressure gives acceleration. Prediction: Acceleration is proportional to air pressure on Earth, less pressure implies less push and so less force (basically acceleration).

2. The stack of air pressure is directional, and so objects fall opposite to the stacking direction of the air pressure gradient. This can only imply that pressure presses against objects meeting it. Prediction: Any falling object or airplane at high altitudes will meet the higher pressures on the ground, which will press up against it while the top overlaying pressure presses in the opposite direction. This means that the same force we observe that keeps us to ground at 1G is applied up to a descending object, which means acceleration will decrease and at some point where the stack above will be equal to below and so the object will levitate in equilibrium.

If this is not the case with Denspressure and something independent of the air pressure is pushing down for acceleration, then explain what that is.

The first one is debunked by the fact that acceleration is still consistent in a partial vacuum, as sokarul put out:




The second one is false since you'd shift weight significantly at higher altitudes, especially in a plane flight.

Barometer Pressure:
p = 101325 (1 - 2.25577 10-5 h)5.25588 
Where h is the altitude above sea level, p is air pressure, and the '101325' is the Standard Temperature and Pressure and NTP, which will work for the basic purposes here.*

p = 101325 (1 - 2.25577 10-5 0)5.25588 
p=101 kPa
At Sea level, the air pressure is 101 kPa.

p = 101325 (1 - 2.25577 10-5 [30,000])5.25588 
p= 30.1 kPa
At 30,000 feet, it's 30.1 kPa

An air pressure drop from 101 to 30.1 kPa with passenger planes, the weight of them would drop significantly, flying much easier relative to the thrust they got.
So, why aren't planes dropping at least 50% of their weight at high altitudes or do they?

*http://www.engineeringtoolbox.com/stp-standard-ntp-normal-air-d_772.html
« Last Edit: October 08, 2017, 03:29:22 AM by AltSpace »
“Two things are infinite: the universe and human stupidity; and I'm not sure about the universe.”
― Albert Einstein

Re: About density and buoyancy that I don't see people bring up.
« Reply #512 on: October 08, 2017, 01:33:02 AM »
Buoyancy works in accordance with g (acceleration), basic formula:
Fb = ρgV = ρghA
Where Fb is the buoyant force of the medium, ρ is liquid density, g is acceleration (9.81 m/s^2), V is the volume of displaced, h is the height of water displaced by object, and A is the surface area of the floating object.
You mean the cross sectional area, which only applies to prismatic objects.

*

AltSpace

  • Flat Earth Believer
  • 411
  • Neo-Planarist
Re: About density and buoyancy that I don't see people bring up.
« Reply #513 on: October 08, 2017, 03:30:09 AM »
Buoyancy works in accordance with g (acceleration), basic formula:
Fb = ρgV = ρghA
Where Fb is the buoyant force of the medium, ρ is liquid density, g is acceleration (9.81 m/s^2), V is the volume of displaced, h is the height of water displaced by object, and A is the surface area of the floating object.
You mean the cross sectional area, which only applies to prismatic objects.
Updated it, thanks!
“Two things are infinite: the universe and human stupidity; and I'm not sure about the universe.”
― Albert Einstein

Re: About density and buoyancy that I don't see people bring up.
« Reply #514 on: November 06, 2017, 11:05:50 AM »
Why does the interior air not move as an equally pressurized whole with the rest of the train car?
It does if the train car is at a steady speed, because the excess pressure is equalised and even though it's marginally more compressed inside the entire car, it creates no added push onto a person in any specific direction and is not severe enough around a person to be mindful of it in terms of identifying it and any excess.
What about when it is not a steady speed?  While accelerating, why doesn't the interior air move as an equally pressurized whole?
Because the vehicle is pushing into atmosphere with more energy and continuously compressing it in one direction which never has the chance to equalise until the vehicle ceases to accelerate.
Yes, you're explaining what happens in this situation in your model, but you're not explaining 'why'. 

Why is the air inside acting that way under acceleration?
  I see you're back Scepti.  Have you figured out an answer for that question yet?

Re: About density and buoyancy that I don't see people bring up.
« Reply #515 on: November 06, 2017, 11:15:28 AM »
Why does the interior air not move as an equally pressurized whole with the rest of the train car?
It does if the train car is at a steady speed, because the excess pressure is equalised and even though it's marginally more compressed inside the entire car, it creates no added push onto a person in any specific direction and is not severe enough around a person to be mindful of it in terms of identifying it and any excess.
What about when it is not a steady speed?  While accelerating, why doesn't the interior air move as an equally pressurized whole?
Because the vehicle is pushing into atmosphere with more energy and continuously compressing it in one direction which never has the chance to equalise until the vehicle ceases to accelerate.
Yes, you're explaining what happens in this situation in your model, but you're not explaining 'why'. 

Why is the air inside acting that way under acceleration?
  I see you're back Scepti.  Have you figured out an answer for that question yet?

look at his response to my post:

so you say that water act like gas as it sloshes in its containment.
than I say that solid bodies also "slosh" like water and gas do in a containment.
so the body get "slosh" in the car the same way as the atmosphere does.
so the body moves forward because of that sloshing, or we could call it inertia

you explanation does not support you denpressure is even more disprove it.
Ok no problem. You carry on.

thanks for confirming my conclusion that you explanation does not support your claim and is therefore useless for your claims.

I think we can that take that way that he admit that his explanation does not support his idea of denpressure.



?

sceptimatic

  • Flat Earth Scientist
  • 23789
Re: About density and buoyancy that I don't see people bring up.
« Reply #516 on: November 07, 2017, 01:15:30 AM »
Why does the interior air not move as an equally pressurized whole with the rest of the train car?
It does if the train car is at a steady speed, because the excess pressure is equalised and even though it's marginally more compressed inside the entire car, it creates no added push onto a person in any specific direction and is not severe enough around a person to be mindful of it in terms of identifying it and any excess.
What about when it is not a steady speed?  While accelerating, why doesn't the interior air move as an equally pressurized whole?
Because the vehicle is pushing into atmosphere with more energy and continuously compressing it in one direction which never has the chance to equalise until the vehicle ceases to accelerate.
Yes, you're explaining what happens in this situation in your model, but you're not explaining 'why'. 

Why is the air inside acting that way under acceleration?
  I see you're back Scepti.  Have you figured out an answer for that question yet?

look at his response to my post:

so you say that water act like gas as it sloshes in its containment.
than I say that solid bodies also "slosh" like water and gas do in a containment.
so the body get "slosh" in the car the same way as the atmosphere does.
so the body moves forward because of that sloshing, or we could call it inertia

you explanation does not support you denpressure is even more disprove it.
Ok no problem. You carry on.

thanks for confirming my conclusion that you explanation does not support your claim and is therefore useless for your claims.

I think we can that take that way that he admit that his explanation does not support his idea of denpressure.
You can take it that I can't be bothered to waste too much time on you.

Re: About density and buoyancy that I don't see people bring up.
« Reply #517 on: November 07, 2017, 05:56:33 PM »
"Why is the air inside acting that way under acceleration?"

Did you give up Scepti?

?

sceptimatic

  • Flat Earth Scientist
  • 23789
Re: About density and buoyancy that I don't see people bring up.
« Reply #518 on: November 08, 2017, 12:13:21 AM »
"Why is the air inside acting that way under acceleration?"

Did you give up Scepti?
Acting what way?

Re: About density and buoyancy that I don't see people bring up.
« Reply #519 on: November 08, 2017, 01:19:43 AM »
"Why is the air inside acting that way under acceleration?"

Did you give up Scepti?
Acting what way?
Why does it "slosh around"?
How come when you accelerate, water and air appear to move backwards?
How come when you stop (or slow down), it appears to move forwards?

?

sceptimatic

  • Flat Earth Scientist
  • 23789
Re: About density and buoyancy that I don't see people bring up.
« Reply #520 on: November 08, 2017, 02:22:46 AM »
"Why is the air inside acting that way under acceleration?"

Did you give up Scepti?
Acting what way?
Why does it "slosh around"?
How come when you accelerate, water and air appear to move backwards?
How come when you stop (or slow down), it appears to move forwards?
I've explained it all. A re not bothering to read or are you just concentrating on denial rather than concentrating on my musing?

This is the last time I explain it to you.


Quote from: JackBlack
Why does it "slosh around"?
Because molecules get compressed by energy from a dense mass which decompress upon release of that energy.
The speed of release determines the power of the slosh.
The slosh happens in a sort of way if you could imagine trying to keep a mass of footballs against a wall in between another wall a few feet away and then releasing your power on them to see them decompress and hit the wall behind you then slightly compress against that you then rebound back, until they lose they equalise their surroundings.


Quote from: JackBlack
How come when you accelerate, water and air appear to move backwards?
By pushing into atmosphere going forwards which compresses that atmosphere and in turn builds a pressure up inside a vehicle or upon a person in it.
This is then pushed back and in case of water, the compressed air will hold it back until you cease to accelerate.


Quote from: JackBlack
How come when you stop (or slow down), it appears to move forwards?
the opposite of above.
You release the force upon the built up atmospheric pressure (compression) which springs back, as in the ball analogy.

Surely you have no excuse to pretend not to understand this.

Re: About density and buoyancy that I don't see people bring up.
« Reply #521 on: November 08, 2017, 02:35:19 AM »
I've explained it all. A re not bothering to read or are you just concentrating on denial rather than concentrating on my musing?
This is the last time I explain it to you.
No, you didn't.
You said a bunch of nonsense which failed to explain anything.

Because molecules get compressed by energy from a dense mass which decompress upon release of that energy.
The speed of release determines the power of the slosh.
The slosh happens in a sort of way if you could imagine trying to keep a mass of footballs against a wall in between another wall a few feet away and then releasing your power on them to see them decompress and hit the wall behind you then slightly compress against that you then rebound back, until they lose they equalise their surroundings.
Again, this doesn't happen.
The air compresses when it accelerates, but that isn't why it appears to slosh backwards.
It compresses because it is sloshing backwards.
The car is not trying to compress the air, just move it along with the car.
Then when the car is travelling at speed, there is no compression. The air inside is uniform in pressure (ignoring the slight vertical gradients).
Then when you stop, the air sloshes forwards.

So this does not explain it at all.

Also, using an analogy doesn't help. You can't explain why the football does that either, not without appealing to inertia (either directly or in disguise).

By pushing into atmosphere going forwards which compresses that atmosphere and in turn builds a pressure up inside a vehicle or upon a person in it.
This is then pushed back and in case of water, the compressed air will hold it back until you cease to accelerate.
No, it doesn't. Pushing into the atmosphere does not create any pressure inside a vehicle.
You can easily see this by comparing driving at high speed in a car vs sticking your head/hand out the window at high speed.
The 2 are quite different.

And if this was the case, then while driving at constant speed, you would still be pushing into the atmosphere and that should keep the magic happening, with the water continuing to be pushed back. When you slow down, it would level out. But again, THIS DOESN'T HAPPEN.

Quote from: JackBlack
the opposite of above.
You release the force upon the built up atmospheric pressure (compression) which springs back, as in the ball analogy.
Again, that wouldn't make it go forward, that would make it level out.
It also isn't the opposite of the above. The opposite of the above would require the car to move backwards.

Surely you have no excuse to pretend not to understand this.
I do understand. I understand it doesn't work. I understand what reality would look like if that kind of thing was happening, and it doesn't match reality that I observe.

?

sceptimatic

  • Flat Earth Scientist
  • 23789
Re: About density and buoyancy that I don't see people bring up.
« Reply #522 on: November 08, 2017, 04:50:34 AM »
Can anyone else understand what I'm trying to tell Jackblack?

Re: About density and buoyancy that I don't see people bring up.
« Reply #523 on: November 08, 2017, 06:22:54 PM »
"Why is the air inside acting that way under acceleration?"

Did you give up Scepti?
Acting what way?
Because you have only described 'what' it is doing, not 'why'.

Can anyone else understand what I'm trying to tell Jackblack?

It seems that you're saying the air is at rest, and as the vehicle accelerates, the air molecules initially resist that change of state of motion they are in.

Is that correct?

?

sceptimatic

  • Flat Earth Scientist
  • 23789
Re: About density and buoyancy that I don't see people bring up.
« Reply #524 on: November 09, 2017, 01:41:21 AM »
"Why is the air inside acting that way under acceleration?"

Did you give up Scepti?
Acting what way?
Because you have only described 'what' it is doing, not 'why'.

Can anyone else understand what I'm trying to tell Jackblack?

It seems that you're saying the air is at rest, and as the vehicle accelerates, the air molecules initially resist that change of state of motion they are in.

Is that correct?
Ok, first of all we all know the air is never at rest. We know it's always expanding and contracting due to applied energy, whether it's us in it or the sun and what not creating movement.
We don't need to think on this part but I'm just letting it be known that I'm not advocating molecules at rest, totally.


However, for the sake of answering your question we will use the at rest mindset to give you the thought process.

Inside the vehicle and outside, we have an air pressure. It's sort of equal to us in terms of compression or psi upon us.
Once we use energy to change that by movement, we compress that air more in whatever direction we move into.
That compression will apply more pressure to the vehicle externally by friction, whilst that vehicle pushes into it and compresses that atmosphere in such a way where it is force around the car to try and equalise the lower pressure behind it.

Inside the vehicle there is nowhere for the compression to release as quickly as that and the small voids inside of the vehicle allow a build up and a very slow release, so basically keeping a pressure without the feeling of friction against the person due to the pressure release being too slow.

All this does is places a push build up ( under acceleration) or a pressure build up (push) after acceleration onto the inside of the vehicle and the person.


Re: About density and buoyancy that I don't see people bring up.
« Reply #525 on: November 09, 2017, 02:17:14 AM »
Inside the vehicle and outside, we have an air pressure. It's sort of equal to us in terms of compression or psi upon us.
Once we use energy to change that by movement, we compress that air more in whatever direction we move into.
Again, why/how?

That compression will apply more pressure to the vehicle externally by friction
Because you are pushing into it. That doesn't affect the air inside.

Inside the vehicle there is nowhere for the compression to release as quickly
It only seems to get compressed during acceleration, and only at the back of the vehicle. It has plenty of space to decompress at the front.

All this does is places a push build up ( under acceleration) or a pressure build up (push) after acceleration onto the inside of the vehicle and the person.
No, after the acceleration while you are travelling at constant speed, there is no pressure built up or push or anything like that. The car is at atmospheric pressure. There is no pressure gradient across it. This can be seen simplest with a bowl of water, with its surface level.

?

sceptimatic

  • Flat Earth Scientist
  • 23789
Re: About density and buoyancy that I don't see people bring up.
« Reply #526 on: November 09, 2017, 02:42:23 AM »
Inside the vehicle and outside, we have an air pressure. It's sort of equal to us in terms of compression or psi upon us.
Once we use energy to change that by movement, we compress that air more in whatever direction we move into.
Again, why/how?
Because molecules compress and expand.


That compression will apply more pressure to the vehicle externally by friction
Because you are pushing into it. That doesn't affect the air inside.
If you had a bicycle pump and the plunger was down and the small screw hole was open and facing forwards, horizontally as you hung it out of a car window, do you think the atmosphere your car was pushing into would also get into that pump and push the plunger out?
I'll see how you answer this just so I can figure out whether you have the ability to think.

Inside the vehicle there is nowhere for the compression to release as quickly
It only seems to get compressed during acceleration, and only at the back of the vehicle. It has plenty of space to decompress at the front.
It only SEEMS is the key.
It only seems because that's how you perceive it after acceleration rather than realising the extra pressure upon you has built marginally.

All this does is places a push build up ( under acceleration) or a pressure build up (push) after acceleration onto the inside of the vehicle and the person.
No, after the acceleration while you are travelling at constant speed, there is no pressure built up or push or anything like that. The car is at atmospheric pressure. There is no pressure gradient across it. This can be seen simplest with a bowl of water, with its surface level.
You're wrong.

Re: About density and buoyancy that I don't see people bring up.
« Reply #527 on: November 09, 2017, 11:34:01 AM »
Because molecules compress and expand.
So why are the molecules in the car compressing?
It isn't some random occurrence. There needs to be an explanation.

If you had a bicycle pump and the plunger was down and the small screw hole was open and facing forwards, horizontally as you hung it out of a car window, do you think the atmosphere your car was pushing into would also get into that pump and push the plunger out?
I'll see how you answer this just so I can figure out whether you have the ability to think.
Why do you appeal to so many false analogies?
How about this, instead of leaving it like that, cover the hole to represent the windscreen, or better yet, keep it inside the car. Will the air push the plunger out now? No.

Why do you always seem to resort to such horribly flawed analogies which do not apply to the situation at all?
Why can't you just address the issues that have been raised?

It only SEEMS is the key.
It only seems because that's how you perceive it after acceleration rather than realising the extra pressure upon you has built marginally.
Fine, it only gets compressed during acceleration.
Happy now?
That is what all the evidence indicates.
There is no pressure gradient built up across the car while it is moving at constant speed.
A bowl of water isn't pushed to one side while moving at constant speed.
A helium filled balloon on a string goes straight up while moving at constant speed.

And as there is no extra air, it can't be compressed as there is no pressure gradient. Even if it was compressed that wouldn't magically make things slosh around.

No, after the acceleration while you are travelling at constant speed, there is no pressure built up or push or anything like that. The car is at atmospheric pressure. There is no pressure gradient across it. This can be seen simplest with a bowl of water, with its surface level.
You're wrong.
[/quote]
No, I'm not. Again, try it with a bowl of water. While travelling at constant speed, it's surface is level. It doesn't magically slope backwards like it does when you accelerate.

Face it, your model does not work.

Re: About density and buoyancy that I don't see people bring up.
« Reply #528 on: November 09, 2017, 05:40:18 PM »
"Why is the air inside acting that way under acceleration?"

Did you give up Scepti?
Acting what way?
Because you have only described 'what' it is doing, not 'why'.

Can anyone else understand what I'm trying to tell Jackblack?

It seems that you're saying the air is at rest, and as the vehicle accelerates, the air molecules initially resist that change of state of motion they are in.

Is that correct?
Ok, first of all we all know the air is never at rest. We know it's always expanding and contracting due to applied energy, whether it's us in it or the sun and what not creating movement.
We don't need to think on this part but I'm just letting it be known that I'm not advocating molecules at rest, totally.
Yep.

Quote
However, for the sake of answering your question we will use the at rest mindset to give you the thought process.

Inside the vehicle and outside, we have an air pressure. It's sort of equal to us in terms of compression or psi upon us.
Once we use energy to change that by movement, we compress that air more in whatever direction we move into.
That compression will apply more pressure to the vehicle externally by friction, whilst that vehicle pushes into it and compresses that atmosphere in such a way where it is force around the car to try and equalise the lower pressure behind it.
Not concerned about the outside at the moment.

Quote
Inside the vehicle there is nowhere for the compression to release as quickly as that and the small voids inside of the vehicle allow a build up and a very slow release, so basically keeping a pressure without the feeling of friction against the person due to the pressure release being too slow.

All this does is places a push build up ( under acceleration) or a pressure build up (push) after acceleration onto the inside of the vehicle and the person.
Ok, let's try this again.  The vehicle accelerates and the air is compressed in the back until the vehicle is no longer accelerating, and then it equalizes.  Great.  Got it.

But why does the air compress at the rear of the interior instead of moving all at once? 

Why doesn't it at least equalize instantly the moment the vehicle moves and the rear-most air is pushed into the rest?

?

sceptimatic

  • Flat Earth Scientist
  • 23789
Re: About density and buoyancy that I don't see people bring up.
« Reply #529 on: November 09, 2017, 11:36:21 PM »
Because molecules compress and expand.
So why are the molecules in the car compressing?
It isn't some random occurrence. There needs to be an explanation.
You got an explanation; deal with it.



If you had a bicycle pump and the plunger was down and the small screw hole was open and facing forwards, horizontally as you hung it out of a car window, do you think the atmosphere your car was pushing into would also get into that pump and push the plunger out?
I'll see how you answer this just so I can figure out whether you have the ability to think.
Why do you appeal to so many false analogies?
How about this, instead of leaving it like that, cover the hole to represent the windscreen, or better yet, keep it inside the car. Will the air push the plunger out now? No.
The syringe is the car. The plunger seal is your body in that car.


Why do you always seem to resort to such horribly flawed analogies which do not apply to the situation at all?
Why can't you just address the issues that have been raised?
They're not. It's just that people like yourself are just too irate to grasp them.

It only SEEMS is the key.
It only seems because that's how you perceive it after acceleration rather than realising the extra pressure upon you has built marginally.
Fine, it only gets compressed during acceleration.
Happy now?
Nope.
It gets compressed at all times under movement, whether it's acceleration or a constant velocity.
The only difference is in one builds a pressure (compression through acceleration) and the other holds a higher pressure (compression constant due to constant speed).


That is what all the evidence indicates.
There is no pressure gradient built up across the car while it is moving at constant speed.
A bowl of water isn't pushed to one side while moving at constant speed.
A helium filled balloon on a string goes straight up while moving at constant speed.
Correct. I've already told you this.
Pay attention.
The pressure has built but it's sort of equalised inside because you cannot feel the slow release of it and so everything appears as normal because that little extra pressure is rarely thought of....but it's there.


And as there is no extra air, it can't be compressed as there is no pressure gradient. Even if it was compressed that wouldn't magically make things slosh around.
Understand what sloshing around with compressed air is and come back to me because I'm not going to spend an eternity trying to get you up to speed when you seem to just go backwards at every opportunity.




Face it, your model does not work.
Face it, you're too irate and unable to grasp analogies and logical thought because your mindset if firmly buried in the books and info handed to you on a massive platter.
« Last Edit: November 09, 2017, 11:38:42 PM by sceptimatic »

?

sceptimatic

  • Flat Earth Scientist
  • 23789
Re: About density and buoyancy that I don't see people bring up.
« Reply #530 on: November 10, 2017, 12:34:21 AM »
Ok, let's try this again.  The vehicle accelerates and the air is compressed in the back until the vehicle is no longer accelerating, and then it equalizes.  Great.  Got it.

But why does the air compress at the rear of the interior instead of moving all at once? 

Why doesn't it at least equalize instantly the moment the vehicle moves and the rear-most air is pushed into the rest?
It doesn't compress just at the rear. It's more compressed towards the rear under acceleration because it's always a compression build toward the back but is still under similar build up from the front to that back.
It's like pushing a football to the back and then another against it and so on and so on until the vehicle is full of them.
Outside is a world of footballs.
You push into them and they hit the footballs inside the vehicle and compress them which is felt from front to back on each ball in that container.
The more pushing the more compression.

If that speed is maintained as a constant then that compression holds more or less evenly.
If you keep accelerating (pushing harder) then the compression will build towards the back as a build up from the front.

Slam on the brakes and all those compressed balls release their energy by slamming towards the front because you've created a lower pressure in front of your vehicle  by not pushing into the footballs in front because they have crashed into the footballs you were moving away from and those pressurised ones are now crashing into those as well as your internal decompression of your vehicle.
It creates a massive slam in the opposite direction...or a slosh, because once it does that it will compress to the front and then slam back with much less force, before equalising.

It might be a crude analogy but it's one that (if thought about) shows what's going on.


Re: About density and buoyancy that I don't see people bring up.
« Reply #531 on: November 10, 2017, 12:35:20 AM »
You got an explanation; deal with it.
I did. I explained why it didn't work.
Deal with it.

The syringe is the car. The plunger seal is your body in that car.
Does the car have a large hole in the front of it letting the air in? NO!
So it is a false analogy. Try again.

Why do you always seem to resort to such horribly flawed analogies which do not apply to the situation at all?
Why can't you just address the issues that have been raised?
They're not. It's just that people like yourself are just too irate to grasp them.
No, it has nothing to do with me being irate.
They are fundamentally flawed, and I explained. But of course, you just ignore why they are flawed. You can't even defend your analogies.

Nope.
It gets compressed at all times under movement, whether it's acceleration or a constant velocity.
No it doesn't.
Again, a helium balloon shows this. It is sealed. It has a set amount of air and has a particular volume, at a particular temperature. This allows you to determine the pressure.
This doesn't change depending upon speed. So there is no compression. Stop just asserting the same bullshit as if it magically makes it true.

The only difference is in one builds a pressure (compression through acceleration) and the other holds a higher pressure (compression constant due to constant speed).
Acceleration doesn't build pressure. It establishes a pressure gradient.
The acceleration is needed to hold this.

Correct. I've already told you this.
Pay attention.
You are yet to explain it (in a rational manner).

The pressure has built but it's sort of equalised inside because you cannot feel the slow release of it and so everything appears as normal because that little extra pressure is rarely thought of....but it's there.
No, it hasn't. It cannot be detected at all in any way. There is absolutely no reason to think there is magic extra pressure.

Understand what sloshing around with compressed air is and come back to me because I'm not going to spend an eternity trying to get you up to speed when you seem to just go backwards at every opportunity.
The only reason I seem to go backwards at every opportunity is because you are going backwards, against all rational thought, so those going forwards seem to be going backwards.

I do understand, stop treating me like an idiot.
Either defend your claims or stop making them.

Face it, you're too irate and unable to grasp analogies and logical thought because your mindset if firmly buried in the books and info handed to you on a massive platter.
If that was the case you would have been able to refute me rather than ignoring or dismissing the objections.
So no, I understand why your analogies are pure BS, as I explained, based upon rational thought.

It has nothing at all to do with mainstream science which provides explanations while you completely fail, explanations which make sense and which all the available evidence supports.

Stop acting like people are brainwashed just because they reject your BS, especially not when they explain why your BS is BS.

Re: About density and buoyancy that I don't see people bring up.
« Reply #532 on: November 10, 2017, 12:40:59 AM »
It doesn't compress just at the rear. It's more compressed towards the rear under acceleration because it's always a compression build toward the back but is still under similar build up from the front to that back.
Again, WHY????
You are yet to explain it.
Appealing to analogies based upon things you reject like inertia is pointless.

It's like pushing a football to the back and then another against it and so on and so on until the vehicle is full of them.
No it isn't.
It is like having a car mostly full of them then accelerating and having them all move to the back of the car.
Why do they do this?
There is nothing pushing them there.
It is almost as if their inertia results in them moving back.

You push into them and they hit the footballs inside the vehicle
No, they hit the windscreen which is protecting the footballs inside.

and compress them which is felt from front to back on each ball in that container.
Which would require them to take up less volume, but they don't.
They still fill the car.

Slam on the brakes and all those compressed balls release their energy by slamming towards the front
Why?
Compression has no preferential direction.
They should expand outwards, not towards the front.

because you've created a lower pressure in front of your vehicle
No, you haven't.
You have started to remove the increase in pressure at the front of the vehicle. Until you start going backwards, you wont be having the pressure at the front lower than at the back.

It might be a crude analogy but it's one that (if thought about) shows what's going on.
It is a horribly flawed analogy that blatantly misrepresents what is going on.

?

sceptimatic

  • Flat Earth Scientist
  • 23789
Re: About density and buoyancy that I don't see people bring up.
« Reply #533 on: November 10, 2017, 12:47:12 AM »
You got an explanation; deal with it.
I did. I explained why it didn't work.
Deal with it.

The syringe is the car. The plunger seal is your body in that car.
Does the car have a large hole in the front of it letting the air in? NO!
So it is a false analogy. Try again.

Why do you always seem to resort to such horribly flawed analogies which do not apply to the situation at all?
Why can't you just address the issues that have been raised?
They're not. It's just that people like yourself are just too irate to grasp them.
No, it has nothing to do with me being irate.
They are fundamentally flawed, and I explained. But of course, you just ignore why they are flawed. You can't even defend your analogies.

Nope.
It gets compressed at all times under movement, whether it's acceleration or a constant velocity.
No it doesn't.
Again, a helium balloon shows this. It is sealed. It has a set amount of air and has a particular volume, at a particular temperature. This allows you to determine the pressure.
This doesn't change depending upon speed. So there is no compression. Stop just asserting the same bullshit as if it magically makes it true.

The only difference is in one builds a pressure (compression through acceleration) and the other holds a higher pressure (compression constant due to constant speed).
Acceleration doesn't build pressure. It establishes a pressure gradient.
The acceleration is needed to hold this.

Correct. I've already told you this.
Pay attention.
You are yet to explain it (in a rational manner).

The pressure has built but it's sort of equalised inside because you cannot feel the slow release of it and so everything appears as normal because that little extra pressure is rarely thought of....but it's there.
No, it hasn't. It cannot be detected at all in any way. There is absolutely no reason to think there is magic extra pressure.

Understand what sloshing around with compressed air is and come back to me because I'm not going to spend an eternity trying to get you up to speed when you seem to just go backwards at every opportunity.
The only reason I seem to go backwards at every opportunity is because you are going backwards, against all rational thought, so those going forwards seem to be going backwards.

I do understand, stop treating me like an idiot.
Either defend your claims or stop making them.

Face it, you're too irate and unable to grasp analogies and logical thought because your mindset if firmly buried in the books and info handed to you on a massive platter.
If that was the case you would have been able to refute me rather than ignoring or dismissing the objections.
So no, I understand why your analogies are pure BS, as I explained, based upon rational thought.

It has nothing at all to do with mainstream science which provides explanations while you completely fail, explanations which make sense and which all the available evidence supports.

Stop acting like people are brainwashed just because they reject your BS, especially not when they explain why your BS is BS.
One quote at a time for you.

?

sceptimatic

  • Flat Earth Scientist
  • 23789
Re: About density and buoyancy that I don't see people bring up.
« Reply #534 on: November 10, 2017, 12:47:45 AM »
It doesn't compress just at the rear. It's more compressed towards the rear under acceleration because it's always a compression build toward the back but is still under similar build up from the front to that back.
Again, WHY????
You are yet to explain it.
Appealing to analogies based upon things you reject like inertia is pointless.

It's like pushing a football to the back and then another against it and so on and so on until the vehicle is full of them.
No it isn't.
It is like having a car mostly full of them then accelerating and having them all move to the back of the car.
Why do they do this?
There is nothing pushing them there.
It is almost as if their inertia results in them moving back.

You push into them and they hit the footballs inside the vehicle
No, they hit the windscreen which is protecting the footballs inside.

and compress them which is felt from front to back on each ball in that container.
Which would require them to take up less volume, but they don't.
They still fill the car.

Slam on the brakes and all those compressed balls release their energy by slamming towards the front
Why?
Compression has no preferential direction.
They should expand outwards, not towards the front.

because you've created a lower pressure in front of your vehicle
No, you haven't.
You have started to remove the increase in pressure at the front of the vehicle. Until you start going backwards, you wont be having the pressure at the front lower than at the back.

It might be a crude analogy but it's one that (if thought about) shows what's going on.
It is a horribly flawed analogy that blatantly misrepresents what is going on.
One quote at a time.

Re: About density and buoyancy that I don't see people bring up.
« Reply #535 on: November 10, 2017, 12:53:13 AM »
One quote at a time for you.
Then pick one to deal with.

?

sceptimatic

  • Flat Earth Scientist
  • 23789
Re: About density and buoyancy that I don't see people bring up.
« Reply #536 on: November 10, 2017, 01:11:11 AM »
One quote at a time for you.
Then pick one to deal with.
You post ONE at a time and I'll deal with them ONE at a time.

Re: About density and buoyancy that I don't see people bring up.
« Reply #537 on: November 10, 2017, 01:30:13 AM »
You post ONE at a time and I'll deal with them ONE at a time.
Fine:
It's like pushing a football to the back and then another against it and so on and so on until the vehicle is full of them.
No it isn't.
It is like having a car mostly full of them then accelerating and having them all move to the back of the car.
Why do they do this?
There is nothing pushing them there.
It is almost as if their inertia results in them moving back.

?

sceptimatic

  • Flat Earth Scientist
  • 23789
Re: About density and buoyancy that I don't see people bring up.
« Reply #538 on: November 10, 2017, 02:05:58 AM »
You post ONE at a time and I'll deal with them ONE at a time.
Fine:
It's like pushing a football to the back and then another against it and so on and so on until the vehicle is full of them.
No it isn't.
It is like having a car mostly full of them then accelerating and having them all move to the back of the car.
Why do they do this?
There is nothing pushing them there.
It is almost as if their inertia results in them moving back.
What about the footballs outside of the car, assuming they were so tiny that you couldn't actually see them, kind of thing. You know, like the atmosphere we are in.

Tell me about the car pushing into the external balls as what happens to them.


*

Macarios

  • 2028
Re: About density and buoyancy that I don't see people bring up.
« Reply #539 on: November 10, 2017, 06:20:23 AM »
Tried to find in this topic explanation to HOW density defines where is "down".
Why all dense objects pull into same direction?
Why they chose that direction?
How they communicate?

Or there's external force that influences that orientation?
What force could it be?

WHY is "down" where it is now?
WHY everything buoyant pulls also "up" in the same direction?
WHY all buoyant objets defined "up" where is it now?
WHY all dense objects defined "down" the same in New York and in Boston?
WHY all buoyant objects defined "up" the same in New York and in Boston?
Or did they?
I don't have to fight about anything.
These things are not about me.
When one points facts out, they speak for themselves.
The main goal in all that is simplicity.