It depends on how a person sees denpressure as a theory.
It isn't a theory. It is a model which is contradicted by reality.
Gravity has no evidence whatsoever but it's used to keep alive a globe in space.
Again, you ignoring the mountains of evidence doesn't mean it doesn't exist.
Also, as has been pointed out many times before, there is plenty of evidence that Earth is round without appealing to gravity.
Utter utter utter nonsense of the highest order and yet bullied and battered into the heads of the young
The only one trying to bully and batter is you.
You continually dismiss gravity as nonsense yet you are unable to provide any rational objection to it.
All you can do is lie about it.
You don't even know what gravity is so don't tell me it matches reality.
You don't know what I know, so stop acting like you do.
Gravity does match reality. Your nonsense does not.
You are 99.9% clueless on my theory but you pretend you know about it.
Again, if that was the case, how am I able to accurately predict what your model would predict?
Why am I able to formulate rational arguments against it which you are completely unable to refute?
This seems to be your only hope left, forget my arguments and just attack me.
That sure indicates you know your model is a load of crap and you are doing whatever you can to cling on to it.
I'm just skipping the rest of your childish crap. Lets see if you can try to make a rational argument.
Can you clarify, why does the photoelectric effect only work on negatively charged metals, and what is negative charge.
Just super friction of molecules by huge pressure of expansion by mass that creates heat.
It's all heat from friction. That all everything is.
The only variations are frequency and pressure applied, or force.
Notice how you aren't actually addressing the question?
How about you go back, read what was asked and try to address it?
I know nothing about gravity...not little.
Well thanks for admitting that you are in no place to judge it at all.
All your claims about things disproving gravity are thus outright lies.
Your claims about gravity being nonsense are likewise, outright lies.
Thanks for exposing your own dishonesty.
Those vacuum centrifuges are not sealed low pressure, they're like a vaccum cleaner in their operation where air comes in and is expelled with a centrifuge in between and also heat.
It's a totally different set up and I think you know this.
Wrong again.
That would be an air-flow centrifuge.
The vacuum centrifuges, such as these:
http://www.biocompare.com/Lab-Equipment/23816-Vacuum-Centrifuge-Concentrators/operate under vacuum.
You keep asking the same thin gs even though you get answers and it baffles me as to why you keep doing it
It is because you repeatedly avoid actually answering the question. Instead you provide answers to a different question or just lie and say you already answered it.
If you really want to understand it then stick to one thing and get it before you move on to the next.
You have already shown you have no interest in doing this.
You will pretend to to get a few simple things it, but as soon as it gets to anything your model can't explain you just start back with your lies again.
I tried the same thing with Jackblack but he's just far too volatile for his own good to take anything in, or even want to.
You mean that I didn't just accept your BS and instead asked questions based upon what you said and reality which you were unable to answer which resulted in you resorting to your typical lies of claiming you have already explained it and insulting me.
I'm not the problem here.
Your model, which doesn't match reality, is the problem.
Do me a favour and don't bother me any more.
If you want us to stop bothering you, stop spouting your lies.
I explained what was required to do for anyone to prove what I'm saying.
It's you people that are avoiding the issue.
Except you are unable to justify why constant speed is important.
And we have all done this (or things similar to it) repeatedly and never experienced what you claim.
Get in your car and find a really steep bank.
Drive up the bank until you cannot accelerate any more but can keep your mph constant or reasonably thereabouts.
You'll find that you have to depress the gas pedal down a little more to keep the mph fairly steady as you advance up the bank.
Notice the contradiction?
If you need to apply more gas to keep the same speed, then applying more before hand will result in acceleration.
Thus your situation is impossible.
Now dip your clutch and see if you carry on in a forward motion or you stop dead and then immediately accelerate back down.
You carry on in a forward motion, as all attempts at doing this has resulted in.
It baffles me how you people are willing to argue this when you can try it and prove it to yourselves.
We have tried, your claims didn't match reality.
Don't argue it with me, argue it with yourself in your vehicle when going up that steep bank.
My vehicle agrees with me. You keep moving forward.
You are the outlier.
Ok for the sake of argument I'm using molecules, no matter what.
I'm not going to be using atoms or gluons or whatever clap trap.
If you don't want to use the correct names for the various parts, stop using those names entirely.
Stop calling anything molecules.
Call them magic air pieces or something else.
Do not try to use a term with a well defined meaning to mean something entirely different.