HAPPY HOAX ANNIVERSARY!!! (Rockets can't fly in a vacuum)

Quote from: Themightykabool on November 05, 2019, 02:54:43 PM

Oh i understand it.
I am smart.
You dont seem to undersrand your own theory.

The hair is has air all around it so it stays up.
If i jump, i have air all around me - should i stay up?

But you claim Air pushes things down.
If its pushing from the top, my hair will be flattened.
Is it?

You claim air is stacked sponges upon spongese in a long chain all the way up to the ice dome.
Yet the air somehow disconndcts when it decides my hair is not part of my body?

Air is displaced in all directions?
So how does that equate to a total net down direction?

Like I said, after all this time you don't understand it.
It's fine proclaiming you're smart but clearly you're not paying attention or are doing this deliberately even after clear explanation from my side.

Maybe you simply go into your schooled stuff which makes you fail to grasp. It doesn't make you less smart but it certainly makes you ignorant.
The fact you used the jump as if you were explaining something, tells me you fail to grasp.

If youre so great and your theory has no chinks then have at it.
Answer a few of these.

Theres only 4 questions

But may I suggest you register at scienceforums.net, and tell them of your findings?

Not much use for you to spend your time here, when you could be rewriting science history.

I'm not rewriting science history I'm merely giving my theory out for those who wish to see alternatives to the schooled versions we've all been forced to devour in order to be graded on paper for our ability to memorise and mimic.

Yet those things appear to work quite well.

What you have is unproven. Hence my suggestion.

I won't bother drawing a diagram for what you ask. It would be pointless.

Why? Because it shows you are completely wrong?
Guess what, that isn't pointless, it shows you are wrong and that rockets work in a vacuum. That is the entire point.

So let's argue a spring.

No. Lets argue gas in the cylinder.
Does it stay contained? If not, what is pushing against to move?

If you want to argue springs, then you can treat the gas as a bunch of tiny springs aligned left to right.
Again, what happens?

Just answer this one on its own and we'll go on from this point.

So you can try to avoid the question yet again?
The situation required is difficult to achieve.
What you actually want to do is have a spring coiled in your hand with something holding it together. A simple case would be a piece of string. A better example would be something that melts in your hand.
This is important because it allows a very rapid removal of whatever is holding the spring together, faster than the spring can respond.
If you do this, you feel the spring push on your hand as it expands.
But it is even easier to see this by pulling on a spring and having it snap or cutting a string which is attached to the spring and the object and the effect can be seen with a slinky. While the spring is in tension, it applies the force, even without something on the other end to pull. But once it has contracted, it will not.

The reason your analogy fails and is EXTREMELY dishonest is because you cannot move your hand out of the way fast enough. That means that by the time your hand is out of the way, the spring is already relaxed.

Now deal with the gas in the cylinder in a vacuum.
Does the gas remain inside it, or does it have something to push against to move?

Quote from: JackBlack

The same applies to other negative thermal expansion coefficient materials.
Denpressure needs them to magically expand when cooling.

Because that's what happens.

I know what happens in reality. The bulk material expands. The atoms do not.
You have no explanation for why they expand.
The actual explanation for why appeals to the voids left in the structure.
But you claim these voids don't exist.
But then how does it expand?

Notice how you completely fail to provide an answer and instead just assert your model works fine, even after it is explained that it doesn't.

He's not proving space is a thing. He's simply showing how liquid and gas react against a solid, by expansion and contraction of molecules, inside and outside.

Empty space is the only justification for this expansion. This is because cooling causes expansion in this case. (or to put it another way, heating causes it to shrink).

You're only arguing from a point of adherence to diagram

No, we are arguing from evidence and explanatory power. Two things your model severely lacks.

I think I do answer 99% of all questions

No you don't, you avoid them, such as by dismissing them as stupid, or claiming we don't understand.

You're basically talking about action and equal and opposite reaction, right?

Or the more basic conservation of momentum. But yes, action-reaction covers it as well.

This would be fine as long as you have leverage.  Everything requires leverage/resistance in order to create the action and equal and opposite reaction.

Which as I have already established, you do.
The gas has the rocket to push against. The rocket has the gas to push against.
The gas and the rocket both provide the necessary resistance to allow them to push each other apart.

If that wasn't the case then the gas has nothing to push against and would need to remain trapped inside a container even though it is exposed to vacuum.

A ship of known measured mass.
A block of metal made from the exact same mass of the ship.
One floats and the other sinks, yet the dense mass is exactly the same.

Now of course you're going to say buoyancy. However we need to argue what is really happening, even though your text books will explain it from your side.
Over to you.

Yes, because buoyancy actually explains it. Do you understand it?
The simplest way of looking at it is to include the air inside the ship as well, which is important in this case.

But the more technical way is noting that due to gravity, there will exist a pressure gradient in any fluid. This is quite easy to measure and has been shown to be real beyond any sane doubt.
This pressure gradient is based upon the height of the fluid and its density.
At the surface of the water, the pressure is atmospheric pressure, the same as the air.
The water from below pushes upwards due to that pressure while the air from above pushes downwards.
Right at the surface the pressure is ~equal, and thus the water pushing up is balanced by the air pushing down.
But when the boat goes into the water, that pressure increases. As said above, this increase is based upon the density of the fluid, so the pressure from the water increase roughly 1000 times as that of the air. This means the pressure of the water will be much larger than that of the air and thus there will be a net upwards force.
The further down it goes, the more the pressure increases.
Eventually one of 2 things will happen:
The body is submerged, and now the water is also pushing down from above, and the important pressure is the difference between the top and bottom surface resulting in a reduction in apparent weight, but not enough to cause the object to float, or
It will be far enough down that the extra pressure of the water pushing up is enough to negate its weight meaning it floats.

For buoyancy on an interface, shape is important.

I'm not rewriting science history I'm merely giving my theory

You are rejecting established science which is based upon mountains of evidence which those using rational thought would accept and providing in its place a collection of nonsense (it isn't a theory, it isn't even an internally consistent hypothesis).

Your "alternative" is not viable in any sane way.

The hair is has air all around it so it stays up.
If i jump, i have air all around me - should i stay up?

No because your dense mass is pushing into the atmosphere and that atmosphere directly above you is also stacked on your head and shoulders.
Your feet resist the crush by using the solid ground as your foundation.
The rest of the atmosphere is enveloped around you and is equalised around you.

For a better analogy of how it works just picture yourself in a large swimming pool. You're enveloped by it and you can feel it crush you very mildly, much more than the atmosphere you're used to living in.
The only difference you have with the water is in terms of inversion, meaning, unlike you pushing into atmosphere and using the ground as your foundation, you're also part of the air in your inflated lungs and cavity gases.
It means you cannot be buoyant.
However, you can in water due to these gases and the denser water squeezes you up as if you were a helium balloon in atmosphere, kind of thing.

However, if you were to try and dive down you would realise the water pushes you back up. It tries to crush you against your energetic push against it.
An inverted way to look at what atmosphere is doing.

However, if we want to take it further and use the swimming pool as a sort of better analogy in terms of being sort of equal, simply go into a pool and blow as much air out of your body as you can and you sink, right?

Imagine if you could release a lot more and end up walking on the bottom of the swimming pool. Now try and jump up.
You'll soon see that you're crushed back down to the bottom.

This happens because you have water directly above you on your head and shoulders and to jump you have to displace it, just as you would have to do against the stacked atmosphere.

But you claim Air pushes things down.
If its pushing from the top, my hair will be flattened.
Is it?

Your hair can be flattened depending on how it grows against that atmosphere.
Look at people with long hair. It's not sticking up into the air.
People with more wiry hair or extremely short hair will see it stick up but then again each hair is under so little pressure per strand point and yet it is enveloped down to the skull which is a larger area that is directly pushing into the above atmospheric stack.

You claim air is stacked sponges upon spongese in a long chain all the way up to the ice dome.
Yet the air somehow disconndcts when it decides my hair is not part of my body?

As above.

Air is displaced in all directions?
So how does that equate to a total net down direction?

Air is displaced in all directions but you are equalised in horizontal directions and are not equalised in a vertical.

If you stand up your feet against solid ground help push your body up against the atmospheric stack directly above all parts of your body that resist that push, such as head and shoulders and even a slightly bended knee or whatever.
The rest of your body is enveloped in a sort of equal all around horizontal direction. It's being squeezed but in equal parts ensuring you are stable.
The same would happen if you laid down, except, instead of the above atmospheric stack pushing down on your head and shoulders as your feet push your head and shoulders into that stack via the use of solid foundation/ground, it's now pushing back against your horizontal body from head to feet...back or front and the width and depth of your horizontally laid out body, meaning stacked pressure is spread out over that lower body and you fell this massive change in pressure by the comfort you get from lying down under that stack.

If youre so great and your theory has no chinks then have at it.
Answer a few of these.

Theres only 4 questions

I think I've put a lot of effort into explaining. I did explain briefly before but this time you have in depth.

Yet those things appear to work quite well.

What you have is unproven. Hence my suggestion.

What do you know is proven in terms of physically knowing, not just a reliance on what you're told, in terms of what I'm arguing.
Let me know and I'll grill you on it.

This would be fine as long as you have leverage. Everything requires leverage/resistance in order to create the action and equal and opposite reaction.

Where would you attribute the 'leverage/resistance' here?

Quote from: rvlvr on November 07, 2019, 12:28:25 AM

Yet those things appear to work quite well.

What you have is unproven. Hence my suggestion.

What do you know is proven in terms of physically knowing, not just a reliance on what you're told, in terms of what I'm arguing.
Let me know and I'll grill you on it.

No. You go grill bigger dogs than I. There are a lot of physicists out there who'd love to hear your model.

Are you afraid of them? They did shut down Sandokhan even though he, too, thought he had it all figured out. Maybe you can do better?

What you have is Dunning-Kruger, and in spades.

Quote from: Themightykabool on November 07, 2019, 12:23:48 AM

The hair is has air all around it so it stays up.
If i jump, i have air all around me - should i stay up?

No because your dense mass is pushing into the atmosphere and that atmosphere directly above you is also stacked on your head and shoulders.
Your feet resist the crush by using the solid ground as your foundation.
The rest of the atmosphere is enveloped around you and is equalised around you.

For a better analogy of how it works just picture yourself in a large swimming pool. You're enveloped by it and you can feel it crush you very mildly, much more than the atmosphere you're used to living in.
The only difference you have with the water is in terms of inversion, meaning, unlike you pushing into atmosphere and using the ground as your foundation, you're also part of the air in your inflated lungs and cavity gases.
It means you cannot be buoyant.
However, you can in water due to these gases and the denser water squeezes you up as if you were a helium balloon in atmosphere, kind of thing.

However, if you were to try and dive down you would realise the water pushes you back up. It tries to crush you against your energetic push against it.
An inverted way to look at what atmosphere is doing.

However, if we want to take it further and use the swimming pool as a sort of better analogy in terms of being sort of equal, simply go into a pool and blow as much air out of your body as you can and you sink, right?

Imagine if you could release a lot more and end up walking on the bottom of the swimming pool. Now try and jump up.
You'll soon see that you're crushed back down to the bottom.

This happens because you have water directly above you on your head and shoulders and to jump you have to displace it, just as you would have to do against the stacked atmosphere.

Quote from: Themightykabool

But you claim Air pushes things down.
If its pushing from the top, my hair will be flattened.
Is it?

Your hair can be flattened depending on how it grows against that atmosphere.
Look at people with long hair. It's not sticking up into the air.
People with more wiry hair or extremely short hair will see it stick up but then again each hair is under so little pressure per strand point and yet it is enveloped down to the skull which is a larger area that is directly pushing into the above atmospheric stack.

Quote from: Themightykabool

You claim air is stacked sponges upon spongese in a long chain all the way up to the ice dome.
Yet the air somehow disconndcts when it decides my hair is not part of my body?

As above.

Quote from: Themightykabool

Air is displaced in all directions?
So how does that equate to a total net down direction?

Air is displaced in all directions but you are equalised in horizontal directions and are not equalised in a vertical.

If you stand up your feet against solid ground help push your body up against the atmospheric stack directly above all parts of your body that resist that push, such as head and shoulders and even a slightly bended knee or whatever.
The rest of your body is enveloped in a sort of equal all around horizontal direction. It's being squeezed but in equal parts ensuring you are stable.
The same would happen if you laid down, except, instead of the above atmospheric stack pushing down on your head and shoulders as your feet push your head and shoulders into that stack via the use of solid foundation/ground, it's now pushing back against your horizontal body from head to feet...back or front and the width and depth of your horizontally laid out body, meaning stacked pressure is spread out over that lower body and you fell this massive change in pressure by the comfort you get from lying down under that stack.

Quote from: Themightykabool

If youre so great and your theory has no chinks then have at it.
Answer a few of these.

Theres only 4 questions

I think I've put a lot of effort into explaining. I did explain briefly before but this time you have in depth.

Woweee
A for effort.... i guess.

You failed to see the conflict in all 4 questions and ad hoc'd your way through them individually.
In doing so provided further confliction to your theory.

In summary
If the origin of "down" is from stacked atmoplane above your head, then how does a weak little hair, being pushed down with the force of your entire body, manage to not be flattened?

Quote from: sceptimatic on November 06, 2019, 11:44:58 PM

This would be fine as long as you have leverage.  Everything requires leverage/resistance in order to create the action and equal and opposite reaction.

Which as I have already established, you do.
The gas has the rocket to push against. The rocket has the gas to push against.
The gas and the rocket both provide the necessary resistance to allow them to push each other apart.

If that wasn't the case then the gas has nothing to push against and would need to remain trapped inside a container even though it is exposed to vacuum.

I've just explained the gas earlier on.

Quote from: sceptimatic on November 06, 2019, 11:44:58 PM

This would be fine as long as you have leverage. Everything requires leverage/resistance in order to create the action and equal and opposite reaction.

Where would you attribute the 'leverage/resistance' here?

This is the same scenario as the medicine ball and skateboard carry on which I've explained clearly.
This is just another fancy way of showing it but the same applies in terms of pushing away atmospheric resistance into compression both ways which creates a lower pressure in between the two inner separating metals, which is filled by the dropped stack into that area.

Whatever is compressed has to be equalised, no matter how much energy is applied.

Quote from: sceptimatic on November 07, 2019, 01:05:23 AM

Quote from: rvlvr on November 07, 2019, 12:28:25 AM

Yet those things appear to work quite well.

What you have is unproven. Hence my suggestion.

What do you know is proven in terms of physically knowing, not just a reliance on what you're told, in terms of what I'm arguing.
Let me know and I'll grill you on it.

No. You go grill bigger dogs than I. There are a lot of physicists out there who'd love to hear your model.

Are you afraid of them? They did shut down Sandokhan even though he, too, thought he had it all figured out. Maybe you can do better?

What you have is Dunning-Kruger, and in spades.

No afraid. I just suspect I'd be banned almost immediately when they can't put me down.
If you know so much about them then send a few over here to grill me...are are they scared?

You failed to see the conflict in all 4 questions and ad hoc'd your way through them individually.
In doing so provided further confliction to your theory.

In summary
If the origin of "down" is from stacked atmoplane above your head, then how does a weak little hair, being pushed down with the force of your entire body, manage to not be flattened?

There's no conflict but feel free to show me if you think there is.

Before replying to either of the above posts it might be wise to research "PLAYING CHESS WITH A PIGEON | Dave Trott's Blog".
It's quite an interesting topic .

In summary
If the origin of "down" is from stacked atmoplane above your head, then how does a weak little hair, being pushed down with the force of your entire body, manage to not be flattened?

I explained the hair. Are you deliberately overlooking it or don't you get it?
If you straighten one hair you will create an equal-ish envelope horizontally around it and your skull will have it embedded like a skinny pointed fence post, if you like.
Now bearing in  mind that the stacked atmosphere is putting around 15 lb's per square inch of pressure  onto anything pushing up against it, you can understand that one hair point is hardly going to have much pressure against its point....right?

Quote from: Stash on November 07, 2019, 01:06:11 AM

Quote from: sceptimatic on November 06, 2019, 11:44:58 PM

This would be fine as long as you have leverage. Everything requires leverage/resistance in order to create the action and equal and opposite reaction.

Where would you attribute the 'leverage/resistance' here?

This is the same scenario as the medicine ball and skateboard carry on which I've explained clearly.
This is just another fancy way of showing it but the same applies in terms of pushing away atmospheric resistance into compression both ways which creates a lower pressure in between the two inner separating metals, which is filled by the dropped stack into that area.

Whatever is compressed has to be equalised, no matter how much energy is applied.

That's just the thing:
- What are the two objects compressing against? Why are both objects moving in opposite directions?
- And why would a lower pressure be created between the two separating objects?  If you and I stood back to back and walked away from each other, would a lower pressure be created between us? Would the stack drop down between us and push us further apart?

Quote from: Themightykabool on November 07, 2019, 01:19:08 AM

In summary
If the origin of "down" is from stacked atmoplane above your head, then how does a weak little hair, being pushed down with the force of your entire body, manage to not be flattened?

I explained the hair. Are you deliberately overlooking it or don't you get it?
If you straighten one hair you will create an equal-ish envelope horizontally around it and your skull will have it embedded like a skinny pointed fence post, if you like.
Now bearing in  mind that the stacked atmosphere is putting around 15 lb's per square inch of pressure  onto anything pushing up against it, you can understand that one hair point is hardly going to have much pressure against its point....right?

You can understand that the average male weighs 85kg?
Supposedly pushed down
Directionally down
From the atmoplane?

You are either deliberately avoiding this point or completely idiotic.
How you like that smugass question put back?

Lets try a different angle.

If you stood on a scale and i sat on your head.
Why then would your hair be flattened?
Would the scale show our combindd wieght?

Quote from: sceptimatic on November 07, 2019, 01:31:07 AM

Quote from: Stash on November 07, 2019, 01:06:11 AM

Quote from: sceptimatic on November 06, 2019, 11:44:58 PM

This would be fine as long as you have leverage. Everything requires leverage/resistance in order to create the action and equal and opposite reaction.

Where would you attribute the 'leverage/resistance' here?

This is the same scenario as the medicine ball and skateboard carry on which I've explained clearly.
This is just another fancy way of showing it but the same applies in terms of pushing away atmospheric resistance into compression both ways which creates a lower pressure in between the two inner separating metals, which is filled by the dropped stack into that area.

Whatever is compressed has to be equalised, no matter how much energy is applied.

That's just the thing:
- What are the two objects compressing against? Why are both objects moving in opposite directions?
- And why would a lower pressure be created between the two separating objects?  If you and I stood back to back and walked away from each other, would a lower pressure be created between us? Would the stack drop down between us and push us further apart?

Let's go through this slowly and carefully...and clearly.

If me and you stood back to back and walked away from each other, so you agree that by doing so we use the ground as our leverage point in order to perform the walk by using our energy to push into the atmosphere in front of us.
And if you agree with that, do you agree that in order to walk your body away from your initial starting point you would other leave a lower pressure that has to be filled as you compress the air in front of you.

We'll get this point out of the way first before we move on.

If you stood on a scale and i sat on your head.
Why then would your hair be flattened?
Would the scale show our combindd wieght?

If I stood on a scale then the atmospheric stack above me would register my scale measurement by me using the scale plate as my new moving foundation as I push into that stack.

You sitting on my head will transfer the mass of us both against the stack by adding to the push against it and also me knowing that this added push is now having to be resisted by my feet and also the moving/spring loaded scale plate.

As jackb mentioned many times ago
In your denP cell theory, if therw is a horizontal limit where the dome meets the ground, the air would behave the same vertically as it doss horizontally.

In this walking away analogy, the "foundation" has no difference in directional bearing than anything else.
You have yet to shown in all thwse yes why down is down.

How does earth down differ from dome side or dome top?
Is the dome not solid?
If my feet are resisting the foindation of ground, what is resisting on the opposite side?
Can the dome not resist the crush and push of the stacked on stacked sponges?
If you took a spring, put on ground, and pushed with your hand, doss it compress?
Hand-spring-wall, does it compress?
Hand-spring-ceiling, doss it compress?
Hand-spring-air, does it cpmprewss?

Quote from: Stash on November 07, 2019, 01:46:09 AM

Quote from: sceptimatic on November 07, 2019, 01:31:07 AM

Quote from: Stash on November 07, 2019, 01:06:11 AM

Quote from: sceptimatic on November 06, 2019, 11:44:58 PM

This would be fine as long as you have leverage. Everything requires leverage/resistance in order to create the action and equal and opposite reaction.

Where would you attribute the 'leverage/resistance' here?

This is the same scenario as the medicine ball and skateboard carry on which I've explained clearly.
This is just another fancy way of showing it but the same applies in terms of pushing away atmospheric resistance into compression both ways which creates a lower pressure in between the two inner separating metals, which is filled by the dropped stack into that area.

Whatever is compressed has to be equalised, no matter how much energy is applied.

That's just the thing:
- What are the two objects compressing against? Why are both objects moving in opposite directions?
- And why would a lower pressure be created between the two separating objects?  If you and I stood back to back and walked away from each other, would a lower pressure be created between us? Would the stack drop down between us and push us further apart?

Let's go through this slowly and carefully...and clearly.

If me and you stood back to back and walked away from each other, so you agree that by doing so we use the ground as our leverage point in order to perform the walk by using our energy to push into the atmosphere in front of us.
And if you agree with that, do you agree that in order to walk your body away from your initial starting point you would other leave a lower pressure that has to be filled as you compress the air in front of you.

We'll get this point out of the way first before we move on.

How am I compressing the air in front of me as I walk when there is nothing to compress it against?

I've just explained the gas earlier on.

No you didn't. You avoided it because you know you can't explain without admitting rockets work in a vacuum.
You said you would make a diagram, and then never did.

Here the issue is again:
You have a simple rocket that looks like this:

The black is the body of the rocket: Note that it is open at one end.
The red is the high pressure gas inside the rocket.

Now, looking at the left edge of the rocket, it is pushing against the high pressure gas next to it. Can it move as it has this gas to push off? Or can it not, because it would just push against the gas and so on until it got to the other side where there is nothing to push against?

Before answering, we are also looking at the gas at the right edge. It is pushing against the high pressure gas next to it. Can it move as it has this gas to push off? Or can it not, because it would just push against the gas and so on until it got to the other side where there is nothing to push against?

Note: These are of the same form. Either both can move, or neither can.
Which is it?
Can the gas leave the rocket with the rocket being pushed away?
Or are they stuck together because there is nothing to push against?

Care to actually try explaining it this time?
You wish to claim that an object needs leverage/resistance to move. Well the only thing for the gas to use is the rocket, or the gas between the rocket and itself (which the rocket can also use).
So does the gas push the rocket away, using it as leverage, or does the gas stay in the rocket?
There is no alternative.

If you wish to disagree you need to be able to explain why.
Why should the gas be able to leave the rocket when it has nothing to push against (other than the rocket), while the rocket can't leave the gas?

Quote from: Themightykabool on November 07, 2019, 12:23:48 AM

The hair is has air all around it so it stays up.
If i jump, i have air all around me - should i stay up?

No because your dense mass is pushing into the atmosphere and that atmosphere directly above you is also stacked on your head and shoulders.
Your feet resist the crush by using the solid ground as your foundation.

The feet aren't on solid ground.
He has jumped. He is in the air.

There is literally no reason for the air to push some objects down and not others.
Your model is pure nonsense.

An inverted way to look at what atmosphere is doing.

Nope, just like what the atmosphere is ACTUALLY doing, where it pushes objects immersed in it upwards, just like the atmosphere.

Air is displaced in all directions but you are equalised in horizontal directions and are not equalised in a vertical.

That is right. The pressure below you is higher, meaning you are pushed up.
Again, there is no reason to be pushed down.

If you stand up your feet against solid ground

We are talking about an object in the air.
Why should that get pushed down? It is surrounded by air all around, and the lower the air is, the higher the pressure.

I think I've put a lot of effort into explaining.

No, like so often, you repeatedly avoided it.
You are yet to talk about an object in the air. Instead you repeatedly referred to an object on the ground.
Try again.

What do you know is proven in terms of physically knowing, not just a reliance on what you're told, in terms of what I'm arguing.
Let me know and I'll grill you on it.

We have already been over this.
You tried to grill me and failed miserably.
What makes you think you will do better now?

The real thing is what do you know is proven in terms of physically knowing, not juts a reliance on pure fantasy?

No afraid. I just suspect I'd be banned almost immediately when they can't put me down.

You mean after you continue to spam the same refuted nonsense and fail to address the issues they raised, instead claiming you already have or that they just don't understand?

You have already been refuted with all the nonsense you have brought up here. What makes you think it will be different there?

Now bearing in  mind that the stacked atmosphere is putting around 15 lb's per square inch of pressure  onto anything pushing up against it, you can understand that one hair point is hardly going to have much pressure against its point....right?

And thanks for admitting that if it was due to pressure, it would be entirely dependent upon the horizontal area.
That if you take a long, thin rod and have it vertical, there will be very little pressure pushing down on it. But if you were to lay it sideways, then there will be push more pressure pushing down on it.
Now this means that if denpressure was the cause of an object's weight, that would result in very different weights for the same object in the same location, in the same atmosphere. But this is never observed.

Thank's for once again refuting your own model.

And also note, that pressure is IN ALL DIRECTIONS! Not down, in every direction.

That means if you take an object in mid air, it is being pushed from all directions, roughly equally. In calm air there is a slight imbalance as the pressure increases with decreasing height, meaning the object is being pushed up more than down.

This can also be used to hold things together, for example, a suction cap against a wall, where there is no air between them so the air pushes the suction cap into the wall (and the air on the other side of the wall pushes it into the suction cap). Note that this isn't pushing down, it pushes into whatever direction the wall is, which can be up or sideways as well as down.

So air pressure is clearly not what is pushing people down.

Now how about you stop bringing up your failed model in general and just deal with the issue at hand.
You have compressed gas inside a tube, open at one end. What happens?
Does it all stay together or does the tube and gas push off each other causing them to each more away from one another.

As jackb mentioned many times ago
In your denP cell theory, if therw is a horizontal limit where the dome meets the ground, the air would behave the same vertically as it doss horizontally.

In this walking away analogy, the "foundation" has no difference in directional bearing than anything else.
You have yet to shown in all thwse yes why down is down.

How does earth down differ from dome side or dome top?
Is the dome not solid?
If my feet are resisting the foindation of ground, what is resisting on the opposite side?
Can the dome not resist the crush and push of the stacked on stacked sponges?
If you took a spring, put on ground, and pushed with your hand, doss it compress?
Hand-spring-wall, does it compress?
Hand-spring-ceiling, doss it compress?
Hand-spring-air, does it cpmprewss?

And you said you knew my theory.
Ifr you did you would not require me to explain it again and again.

Also this is a rocket thread so make another.

And you said you knew my theory.
Ifr you did you would not require me to explain it again and again.

The point is your model contradicts itself. You need to rely upon vastly different and contradictory explanations for so many things rather than having a consistent theory where the one explanation (or set of consistent explanations) can be used for lots of things.

Also this is a rocket thread so make another.

Yes, this is a rocket thread, specifically one for discussing rockets in a vacuum.
So please explain what happens to the compressed gas and tube.
Does it stay together, or does the gas push the tube away?

How am I compressing the air in front of me as I walk when there is nothing to compress it against?

There is plenty to compress against. Air molecules crushing air molecules crushing air molecules and so on which will compress and create a resistance.

If you were to drop a sheet of glass down onto a table, why doesn't it crash down and shatter?
If you were to run through an alley with a sheet of ply board just slightly smaller than the opening, would you be able to run against the air in it it without compressing it?
.

Quote from: sceptimatic on November 07, 2019, 01:25:49 AM

I've just explained the gas earlier on.

No you didn't. You avoided it because you know you can't explain without admitting rockets work in a vacuum.
You said you would make a diagram, and then never did.

Here the issue is again:
You have a simple rocket that looks like this:

The black is the body of the rocket: Note that it is open at one end.
The red is the high pressure gas inside the rocket.

Now, looking at the left edge of the rocket, it is pushing against the high pressure gas next to it. Can it move as it has this gas to push off? Or can it not, because it would just push against the gas and so on until it got to the other side where there is nothing to push against?

Before answering, we are also looking at the gas at the right edge. It is pushing against the high pressure gas next to it. Can it move as it has this gas to push off? Or can it not, because it would just push against the gas and so on until it got to the other side where there is nothing to push against?

Note: These are of the same form. Either both can move, or neither can.
Which is it?
Can the gas leave the rocket with the rocket being pushed away?
Or are they stuck together because there is nothing to push against?

Care to actually try explaining it this time?
You wish to claim that an object needs leverage/resistance to move. Well the only thing for the gas to use is the rocket, or the gas between the rocket and itself (which the rocket can also use).
So does the gas push the rocket away, using it as leverage, or does the gas stay in the rocket?
There is no alternative.

If you wish to disagree you need to be able to explain why.
Why should the gas be able to leave the rocket when it has nothing to push against (other than the rocket), while the rocket can't leave the gas?

Quote from: sceptimatic on November 07, 2019, 01:03:54 AM

Quote from: Themightykabool on November 07, 2019, 12:23:48 AM

The hair is has air all around it so it stays up.
If i jump, i have air all around me - should i stay up?

No because your dense mass is pushing into the atmosphere and that atmosphere directly above you is also stacked on your head and shoulders.
Your feet resist the crush by using the solid ground as your foundation.

The feet aren't on solid ground.
He has jumped. He is in the air.

There is literally no reason for the air to push some objects down and not others.
Your model is pure nonsense.

Quote from: sceptimatic on November 07, 2019, 01:03:54 AM

An inverted way to look at what atmosphere is doing.

Nope, just like what the atmosphere is ACTUALLY doing, where it pushes objects immersed in it upwards, just like the atmosphere.

Quote from: sceptimatic on November 07, 2019, 01:03:54 AM

Air is displaced in all directions but you are equalised in horizontal directions and are not equalised in a vertical.

That is right. The pressure below you is higher, meaning you are pushed up.
Again, there is no reason to be pushed down.

Quote from: sceptimatic on November 07, 2019, 01:03:54 AM

If you stand up your feet against solid ground

We are talking about an object in the air.
Why should that get pushed down? It is surrounded by air all around, and the lower the air is, the higher the pressure.

Quote from: sceptimatic on November 07, 2019, 01:03:54 AM

I think I've put a lot of effort into explaining.

No, like so often, you repeatedly avoided it.
You are yet to talk about an object in the air. Instead you repeatedly referred to an object on the ground.
Try again.

Quote from: sceptimatic on November 07, 2019, 01:05:23 AM

What do you know is proven in terms of physically knowing, not just a reliance on what you're told, in terms of what I'm arguing.
Let me know and I'll grill you on it.

We have already been over this.
You tried to grill me and failed miserably.
What makes you think you will do better now?

The real thing is what do you know is proven in terms of physically knowing, not juts a reliance on pure fantasy?

Quote from: sceptimatic on November 07, 2019, 01:32:49 AM

No afraid. I just suspect I'd be banned almost immediately when they can't put me down.

You mean after you continue to spam the same refuted nonsense and fail to address the issues they raised, instead claiming you already have or that they just don't understand?

You have already been refuted with all the nonsense you have brought up here. What makes you think it will be different there?

Quote from: sceptimatic on November 07, 2019, 01:41:44 AM

Now bearing in  mind that the stacked atmosphere is putting around 15 lb's per square inch of pressure  onto anything pushing up against it, you can understand that one hair point is hardly going to have much pressure against its point....right?

And thanks for admitting that if it was due to pressure, it would be entirely dependent upon the horizontal area.
That if you take a long, thin rod and have it vertical, there will be very little pressure pushing down on it. But if you were to lay it sideways, then there will be push more pressure pushing down on it.
Now this means that if denpressure was the cause of an object's weight, that would result in very different weights for the same object in the same location, in the same atmosphere. But this is never observed.

Thank's for once again refuting your own model.

And also note, that pressure is IN ALL DIRECTIONS! Not down, in every direction.

That means if you take an object in mid air, it is being pushed from all directions, roughly equally. In calm air there is a slight imbalance as the pressure increases with decreasing height, meaning the object is being pushed up more than down.

This can also be used to hold things together, for example, a suction cap against a wall, where there is no air between them so the air pushes the suction cap into the wall (and the air on the other side of the wall pushes it into the suction cap). Note that this isn't pushing down, it pushes into whatever direction the wall is, which can be up or sideways as well as down.

So air pressure is clearly not what is pushing people down.

Now how about you stop bringing up your failed model in general and just deal with the issue at hand.
You have compressed gas inside a tube, open at one end. What happens?
Does it all stay together or does the tube and gas push off each other causing them to each more away from one another.

One question at a time or you're getting blanked.

Quote from: sceptimatic on November 07, 2019, 02:48:53 AM

Also this is a rocket thread so make another.

Yes, this is a rocket thread, specifically one for discussing rockets in a vacuum.
So please explain what happens to the compressed gas and tube.
Does it stay together, or does the gas push the tube away?

The gas will only push the tube away when the end is opened and it can hit resistance as it expands out of that tube.
It does not push on to inner top of the container it pushes on gas molecules all the way through
The gas molecules exposed to the open container decompress against the lesser compressed atmosphere by using the gas molecules behind them to lever off and those gas molecules use the one's behind them to lever off as they push into the one's in front.....and so on all the way through the tank.
It becomes a gas on gas fight, not a gas against rocket push.

The rocket merely sits on this compression and expansion cushion fight. I've explained this so why can;t you grasp it?

Quote from: JackBlack on November 07, 2019, 02:53:30 AM

Quote from: sceptimatic on November 07, 2019, 02:48:53 AM

Also this is a rocket thread so make another.

Yes, this is a rocket thread, specifically one for discussing rockets in a vacuum.
So please explain what happens to the compressed gas and tube.
Does it stay together, or does the gas push the tube away?

The gas will only push the tube away when the end is opened and it can hit resistance as it expands out of that tube.
It does not push on to inner top of the container it pushes on gas molecules all the way through
The gas molecules exposed to the open container decompress against the lesser compressed atmosphere by using the gas molecules behind them to lever off and those gas molecules use the one's behind them to lever off as they push into the one's in front.....and so on all the way through the tank.
It becomes a gas on gas fight, not a gas against rocket push.

The rocket merely sits on this compression and expansion cushion fight. I've explained this so why can;t you grasp it?

Here is JackBlack's tube again. Now what happens if the tube is in a vacuum? It seems that your above explanation should still apply in a vacuum.

There is plenty to compress against. Air molecules crushing air molecules crushing air molecules and so on which will compress and create a resistance.

You mean like what happens with a rocket in a vacuum, with the air molecules in the exhaust creating resistance?

The gas will only push the tube away when the end is opened and it can hit resistance as it expands out of that tube.
It does not push on to inner top of the container it pushes on gas molecules all the way through
The gas molecules exposed to the open container decompress against the lesser compressed atmosphere by using the gas molecules behind them to lever off and those gas molecules use the one's behind them to lever off as they push into the one's in front.....and so on all the way through the tank.

Yes, all the way through the tank, and what is at the end of it? What is the foundation? The tank itself.
That means they are pushing on the tank.
If they aren't, what else is there to push off?

If the air in the middle is enough, then why can't the tank push off that air?

Do you not notice the massive contradiction in your reasoning?

Using your own reasoning you have only those 2 options.
Either the gas in between can be used as leverage/resistance and the rocket can push off that and/or the gas and rocket push off each other, or there is nothing to use as leverage/resistance and thus the gas remains trapped in the tube, unable to move.

So which is it?

If it is something else, then tell us what the gas is pushing off.
It can't be the tank as that means the gas is pushing the tank and thus rockets work in a vacuum.
It can't be the gas in the middle, as that would mean the tank can push off that and thus rockets can work in a vacuum.
In fact, it can't even be anything outside the rocket, because if the gas can use that for leverage, the tank can as well and thus again the rocket can work in a vacuum.