I'm not going to accept something from you if I don't believe it.
And anything that I provide that refutes your model you typically wont believe.
So there is no point in me wasting time to make a picture for you to ignore it.
When you provide an understanding then I'm interested.
Pure BS.
What you mean is if I provide something that agrees with your model you would be interested, but not if I provide something that shows your model is wrong.
It has nothing to do with understanding, but entirely to do with if it contradicts your model.
I've already explained all this in great detail but you've obviously taken little to no notice.
No, you haven't explained. You have repeatedly deflected.
Even now, you still don't address the issue raised and instead just choose to insult me.
It's all about pressure stacking from the to the top and agitation is gained by applied energy or a sweeping pressure push provided by the good old central energy of Earth (the sun).
Failure of this energy in reaching areas of Earth from bottom to top will result in less agitation and a dormancy.
Yes, less agitation, which by your claims should mean the molecules shrink. That means they aren't expanding into a solid dome.
Again, stop treating me like an idiot and actually address the issues raised.
Your logic should come into play when you're dealing with being told there's space between molecules/atoms/matter or whatever, because, for space to exist between anything would mean there wasn't anything to begin with.
Complete non-sequiter.
See, this is where actual logic comes in and shows your claims are not supported at all.
There being free space between things in no way means things cannot exist.
There is no logical connection there at all. You just want to dismiss mainstream science as much as possible, with no logic at all.
If you truly think that is logical, then try to actually justify it with a logical argument.
As for how else logic comes into it, one way is looking at both NTE and PTE materials.
The vast majority of materials expand when heated and thus are PTE materials.
This also applies to the phase change from solid to liquid.
This is entirely consistent with both free space and no free space, along with agitation of molecules/atoms.
However, that doesn't apply to all materials.
For some, including water with its negative expansion upon melting, and many different NTE solids, this doesn't work at all with no free space.
That has no explanation at all for why these things shrink when heated. Instead it predicts everything should EXPAND when heated.
But free space explains it perfectly.
These structures have significant voids in them (free space).
When cold, the structures are rigid, keeping the voids open (by which I simply mean not filled).
But when agitated, that rigid structure becomes more flexible.
This agitation causes the molecules/atoms to start moving into that previously free space, meaning there is less free space in the overall structure and thus the substance shrinks.
So logically, this mere existence of NTE materials, either solids with a negative coefficient of thermal expansion or materials which shrink when they melt allows one to logically conclude that free space is real.
Another key factor, showing that both free space and pull are real, is the transition to a gas, where it goes from a density quite dependent upon the substance, to a much much larger molar volume which is practically identical for every substance for a given pressure and temperature.
If there is no free space and/or no such thing as pull then there is functionally no difference between a liquid and a gas. Both have molecules in very close proximity to one another (or no significant interaction between one another) and thus they should display similar properties and upon heating a liquid it should just continue to gradually expand, with no sudden change, and no massive energy requirement.
But this sudden change shows that the molecules eventually have enough energy, such that they get far enough away from neighbouring molecules such that the attractive force between them becomes negligible and the molecules move freely, with the large energy requirement being the energy required to escape the potential well. This shows that in the liquid phase, molecules are quite close together, practically touching each other such that there is significant attractive (i.e. pulling) forces between them which holds them together. But then in the gas phase, molecules are very distant from one another, with large amounts of free space between the molecules such that there is no significant attractive forces.
This also explains why the behaviour of density is so different.
So yet again, logic shows that there is abundant free space between molecules, this time specifically focusing on a gas.
So if you want to actually use logic rather than wild speculation, that means accepting free space between molecules.
Absolutely everything is attached on all levels. No free space can exist.
So what is outside your dome?