# Sea and air pressure

• 1282 Replies
• 133852 Views

#### JackBlack

• 22202
##### Re: Sea and air pressure
« Reply #30 on: May 26, 2020, 06:24:50 AM »
Of course it's man made. It's a measurement
Stop conflating the measurement and the property that is being measured.
If weight wasn't real, we would all be floating around and be capable of lifting anything.

And I notice you still failed to provide an answer.
Why does your magic push us down? Rather than against a wall, a ceiling, or in any random direction?

The space left at the top of the tube has extreme expanded atmospheric gas. It is not a true vacuum as people perceive a true vacuum to be.
You cannot have free space devoid of anything.
Again, if that was the case, it would work the same with the tube in any orientation, and it would depend on the amount of air trapped.
i.e. nothing like what is observed.
You need to explain why it is the HEIGHT of the COLUMN.

It isn't a question of why the mercury is pushed up the tube.
It is why, when the tube is upside down, the mercury goes all the way to the bottom.
It is why, when the tube is right side up, even at various angles, and regardless of the length of the tube, the height of the mercury in the tube above the surface of the mercury in the dish, is based upon the atmosphere.
It is why a given tube setup doesn't have the same region at the end of the tube with no mercury, regardless of orientation of the tube at a constant pressure.
It is why increasing the length of the tube, yet otherwise setting it up the same, doesn't increase the length of the column and instead increases the length of the gap at the end of the tube.

None of that makes any sense with your nonsense.
But it makes perfect sense with air pressure not being the cause of weight.

Now, care to actually address the points this time? Or will you just offer more deflection?

#### sceptimatic

• Flat Earth Scientist
• 30068
##### Re: Sea and air pressure
« Reply #31 on: May 27, 2020, 12:18:42 AM »

If weight wasn't real, we would all be floating around and be capable of lifting anything.
Dense mass is real. It does not require being weighted on a man made scale to give a measurement of that mass for us to know it's easier or harder to pick up.

So all this floating about stuff makes no sense by using weight...and you know this.

Why does your magic push us down? Rather than against a wall, a ceiling, or in any random direction?

Massive stacked atmosphere above us. As simple as that.
No different to massive amount of water being above a bottom feeding fish or the likes.

#### Stash

• Ethical Stash
• 13398
• I am car!
##### Re: Sea and air pressure
« Reply #32 on: May 27, 2020, 12:29:55 AM »

If weight wasn't real, we would all be floating around and be capable of lifting anything.
Dense mass is real. It does not require being weighted on a man made scale to give a measurement of that mass for us to know it's easier or harder to pick up.

So all this floating about stuff makes no sense by using weight...and you know this.

Why does your magic push us down? Rather than against a wall, a ceiling, or in any random direction?

Massive stacked atmosphere above us. As simple as that.
No different to massive amount of water being above a bottom feeding fish or the likes.

So the stack is pushing in all directions, not just from above?

#### sceptimatic

• Flat Earth Scientist
• 30068
##### Re: Sea and air pressure
« Reply #33 on: May 27, 2020, 12:48:28 AM »

If weight wasn't real, we would all be floating around and be capable of lifting anything.
Dense mass is real. It does not require being weighted on a man made scale to give a measurement of that mass for us to know it's easier or harder to pick up.

So all this floating about stuff makes no sense by using weight...and you know this.

Why does your magic push us down? Rather than against a wall, a ceiling, or in any random direction?

Massive stacked atmosphere above us. As simple as that.
No different to massive amount of water being above a bottom feeding fish or the likes.

So the stack is pushing in all directions, not just from above?
Of course it's pushing in all directions but it is equalised around you horizontally as opposed to above you where it is stacked above your head as your feet are clamped to the deck.

#### Stash

• Ethical Stash
• 13398
• I am car!
##### Re: Sea and air pressure
« Reply #34 on: May 27, 2020, 12:53:09 AM »

If weight wasn't real, we would all be floating around and be capable of lifting anything.
Dense mass is real. It does not require being weighted on a man made scale to give a measurement of that mass for us to know it's easier or harder to pick up.

So all this floating about stuff makes no sense by using weight...and you know this.

Why does your magic push us down? Rather than against a wall, a ceiling, or in any random direction?

Massive stacked atmosphere above us. As simple as that.
No different to massive amount of water being above a bottom feeding fish or the likes.

So the stack is pushing in all directions, not just from above?
Of course it's pushing in all directions but it is equalised around you horizontally as opposed to above you where it is stacked above your head as your feet are clamped to the deck.

How does it get equalised horizontally around me yet not vertically?

#### JackBlack

• 22202
##### Re: Sea and air pressure
« Reply #35 on: May 27, 2020, 01:38:16 AM »
Dense mass is real.
And it doesn't just magically sit there and float.
Instead it falls, and requires the application of a force to hold it in place, with the force counter to that being the weight.

Again, the fact that weight can be measured doesn't magically mean it is just a man made measurement.
If weight was not real we would all be floating, that is because without weight there is no force to keep us on the ground.
Why does your magic push us down? Rather than against a wall, a ceiling, or in any random direction?
Massive stacked atmosphere above us. As simple as that.
Again, clearly not.
Like I pointed out before, if it was going to be that massive amount of atmosphere, why aren't we pushed into a wall or ceiling?
Why does it always push us down?
And far more importantly, why does it then magically push some objects up?

And it clearly isn't just the pressure, as that pushes in all directions, not just down.

No different to massive amount of water being above a bottom feeding fish or the likes.
You mean how objects weigh less due to the massive weight of the water?
And if you go to an even denser fluid like mercury, it weighs less still.

That sure seems to be demonstrating the exact opposite of what you claim.
Instead of the massive amount of water or fluid pushing us down, it pushes us up.

it is equalised around you horizontally as opposed to above you where it is stacked above your head as your feet are clamped to the deck.
Again, WHY? Why does it magically get balanced out horizontally, but not vertically?
And stop trying to deal with a very specific situation.
You need to be able to describe it in general.
This includes an object that was pushed onto a wall, not in contact with the floor, pushed onto a ceiling, not in contact with the floor, and one in mid air.

The fact that you yet again appeal to being clamped to the floor shows that you know you have no actual explanation.

If you were only pushed down because there was atmosphere above but not below, then when pressed against a wall you should be pushed into the wall by the air and not down as there is air away from the wall and above and below you, but not between you and the wall. No object should ever slide down a wall.
If you were only pushed down because there was atmosphere above but not below, then when pressed against a ceiling you should be pushed up into the ceiling by the air and not down as there is air below you, but not between you and the ceiling. No object should ever fall from a ceiling.
If you were only pushed down because there was atmosphere above but not below, then when in mid air, you should float, as now there is air all around. No object should ever accelerate to start going down when in mid air.

#### sceptimatic

• Flat Earth Scientist
• 30068
##### Re: Sea and air pressure
« Reply #36 on: May 27, 2020, 12:07:42 PM »

How does it get equalised horizontally around me yet not vertically?
Horizontally around you you are not using any solid for resistance so the atmosphere in that stack simply equalises around your body, which is why you don't get pushed in any horizontal direction but you do, vertically down.

#### sceptimatic

• Flat Earth Scientist
• 30068
##### Re: Sea and air pressure
« Reply #37 on: May 27, 2020, 12:12:55 PM »
If you were only pushed down because there was atmosphere above but not below, then when in mid air, you should float, as now there is air all around. No object should ever accelerate to start going down when in mid air.
If the atmosphere above you is too weak to push you through the below stacked atmosphere then you would actually go buoyant, assuming you could survive it, which you wouldn't.

But seeing as you are on the deck, you are subjected to all the pressure directly above you and around you, horizontally.

#### rabinoz

• 26528
• Real Earth Believer
##### Re: Sea and air pressure
« Reply #38 on: May 27, 2020, 02:00:48 PM »

How does it get equalised horizontally around me yet not vertically?
Horizontally around you you are not using any solid for resistance so the atmosphere in that stack simply equalises around your body, which is why you don't get pushed in any horizontal direction but you do, vertically down.
That does not explain why you get pushed down at all.

The atmospheric pressure on your head and shoulders is almost identical to that on your feet so atmospheric pressure pushes you nowhere!

#### rabinoz

• 26528
• Real Earth Believer
##### Re: Sea and air pressure
« Reply #39 on: May 27, 2020, 02:14:19 PM »
If you were only pushed down because there was atmosphere above but not below, then when in mid air, you should float, as now there is air all around. No object should ever accelerate to start going down when in mid air.
If the atmosphere above you is too weak to push you through the below stacked atmosphere then you would actually go buoyant, assuming you could survive it, which you wouldn't.
You are buoyant but the density of air (1.225 kg/m3) compared to that of the human body (about 1000 kg/m3) is so low that the buoyant force is negligible compared to your weight.

But with a helium balloon, the situation is quite different.
The average density of the balloon and helium can be less than that of air so the buoyant force can be greater than the weight of the balloon so it goes up.

Over 2200 years Archimedes realised those things.

Quote from: sceptimatic
But seeing as you are on the deck, you are subjected to all the pressure directly above you and around you, horizontally.
And all that pressure presses almost exactly equally in all directions so that there is almost no net force on you body.

See, it's all so simple that a child can understand it but you make it seem all so complicated.

#### JackBlack

• 22202
##### Re: Sea and air pressure
« Reply #40 on: May 27, 2020, 03:26:18 PM »
And when I am against a wall, my front is "pushing out" while my back is "resistance to push back into the wall",

Yet no magical push into the wall.

Your model requires us to already be being pushed down to explain why it doesn't equilibrate in the vertical direction to then try to explain why we are pushed down.

Notice the problem?
You need to already have what you are attempting to explain.
So that still doesn't explain why we are pushed down.

In mid air, we certainly are not using our feet as resistance to being pushed back down, and indeed we do fall down.
So that can't be the case either.

So yet again, you fail to explain why things are pushed down. You fail to explain the magical directionality.

If the atmosphere above you is too weak to push you through the below stacked atmosphere then you would actually go buoyant, assuming you could survive it, which you wouldn't.
So if we are against a roof, we should become buoyant and be pushed up into the roof?

And if you have atmosphere above and below, why should the atmosphere above win?
Why is it just pushing down and the atmosphere below isn't pushing us up.

And that fails to explain buoyant objects on the floor.
Without a significant amount of atmosphere below, and loads above, why do they start floating rather than being pushed down?

And again, we also know that all objects have a buoyant force acting on them.
We can see this by weighing on object in the in a vacuum vs in the atmosphere vs in oil or hexane vs in water vs in dichloromethane vs in mercury (etc).
As the object goes into a denser and denser fluid, its measured weight decreases due to increase in buoyancy. Eventually the buoyant force can become so large that it overcomes its actual weight and it floats and rises.
And that doesn't match up to your nonsense at all.

This is seen even better at an interface. For example, when you have a cylinder or cube floating on the ocean.
If it was a simple matter of the air and water fighting, and because you claim it is only the top and bottom that matters (as horizontally it is all balanced), the amount of fluid displaced should not matter.
Either the air would win and the object is pushed into the ocean, being at least fully submerged, or the water would win and the object is pushed into the air, remaining fully above it.
Or the 2 are perfectly balanced, such that when the object is across the interface there is no upwards or downwards force, and the object will oscillate back and forth, going into the water and sinking until it is completely under at which point the water now acts alone to push it up to the region of balance, and it continues to rise until it breaches the surface and the air pushes it back down, with drag potentially resulting in it eventually stopping somewhere (at random) in the region of balance.
But instead, what we observe is that either the object is more dense than the lower fluid and it displaces its volume of the fluid and sinks, it is less dense than the upper fluid, and thus it displaces its volume of the upper fluid and rises up, or it has a density between the 2 fluids, in which case it displaces its mass with a combination of the 2 fluids, and remains at the interface. For an object with simple geometry, this results in a single equilibrium position where the total mass of both fluids displaced is equal to the mass of the object.

Again, reality does not match your nonsense.

But seeing as you are on the deck
Nope.
Not in the examples I provided. The examples which show your claim to be nonsense. The examples you CANNOT explain.

The fact that you repeatedly need to appeal to objects on the floor, rather than address objects in general shows you cannot explain why things fall and that you know you can't.

How about this, I'll set up a situation, and you can describe the forces acting on an object:

You have an airtight cube.
At the very centre of the cube there is a ball.
There is air all around the ball.
What way does the ball move and why?
Then explain it with a ball that is less dense than air, without contradicting the previous explanation.

Note: The ball is not against the floor, so you CANNOT use it pushing against the floor as part of your explanation.
« Last Edit: May 27, 2020, 03:38:28 PM by JackBlack »

#### sceptimatic

• Flat Earth Scientist
• 30068
##### Re: Sea and air pressure
« Reply #41 on: June 04, 2020, 02:57:34 AM »

How does it get equalised horizontally around me yet not vertically?
Horizontally around you you are not using any solid for resistance so the atmosphere in that stack simply equalises around your body, which is why you don't get pushed in any horizontal direction but you do, vertically down.
That does not explain why you get pushed down at all.

The atmospheric pressure on your head and shoulders is almost identical to that on your feet so atmospheric pressure pushes you nowhere!
When you understand (from my side) how the atmosphere is stacked, then you'll understand why we are pushed/compressed to the solid deck.
It's been explained but it requires people to want to or try to understand it and most simply do not want to...which is fine by me but it doesn't help you and others.

The atmosphere above you is not identical to below your feel.
Your feet are on the deck so there is little atmosphere under your feet but plenty around you and plenty above you that your body has to resist and overcome to exist.
« Last Edit: June 04, 2020, 03:01:41 AM by sceptimatic »

#### sceptimatic

• Flat Earth Scientist
• 30068
##### Re: Sea and air pressure
« Reply #42 on: June 04, 2020, 03:01:22 AM »
And all that pressure presses almost exactly equally in all directions so that there is almost no net force on you body.

See, it's all so simple that a child can understand it but you make it seem all so complicated.
There is plenty of force on your body horizontally and vertically, directly above your head and shoulders.

#### sceptimatic

• Flat Earth Scientist
• 30068
##### Re: Sea and air pressure
« Reply #43 on: June 04, 2020, 03:08:54 AM »
And when I am against a wall, my front is "pushing out" while my back is "resistance to push back into the wall",

Yet no magical push into the wall.

Your model requires us to already be being pushed down to explain why it doesn't equilibrate in the vertical direction to then try to explain why we are pushed down.

Notice the problem?
You need to already have what you are attempting to explain.
So that still doesn't explain why we are pushed down.

In mid air, we certainly are not using our feet as resistance to being pushed back down, and indeed we do fall down.
So that can't be the case either.

So yet again, you fail to explain why things are pushed down. You fail to explain the magical directionality.

If the atmosphere above you is too weak to push you through the below stacked atmosphere then you would actually go buoyant, assuming you could survive it, which you wouldn't.
So if we are against a roof, we should become buoyant and be pushed up into the roof?

And if you have atmosphere above and below, why should the atmosphere above win?
Why is it just pushing down and the atmosphere below isn't pushing us up.

And that fails to explain buoyant objects on the floor.
Without a significant amount of atmosphere below, and loads above, why do they start floating rather than being pushed down?

And again, we also know that all objects have a buoyant force acting on them.
We can see this by weighing on object in the in a vacuum vs in the atmosphere vs in oil or hexane vs in water vs in dichloromethane vs in mercury (etc).
As the object goes into a denser and denser fluid, its measured weight decreases due to increase in buoyancy. Eventually the buoyant force can become so large that it overcomes its actual weight and it floats and rises.
And that doesn't match up to your nonsense at all.

This is seen even better at an interface. For example, when you have a cylinder or cube floating on the ocean.
If it was a simple matter of the air and water fighting, and because you claim it is only the top and bottom that matters (as horizontally it is all balanced), the amount of fluid displaced should not matter.
Either the air would win and the object is pushed into the ocean, being at least fully submerged, or the water would win and the object is pushed into the air, remaining fully above it.
Or the 2 are perfectly balanced, such that when the object is across the interface there is no upwards or downwards force, and the object will oscillate back and forth, going into the water and sinking until it is completely under at which point the water now acts alone to push it up to the region of balance, and it continues to rise until it breaches the surface and the air pushes it back down, with drag potentially resulting in it eventually stopping somewhere (at random) in the region of balance.
But instead, what we observe is that either the object is more dense than the lower fluid and it displaces its volume of the fluid and sinks, it is less dense than the upper fluid, and thus it displaces its volume of the upper fluid and rises up, or it has a density between the 2 fluids, in which case it displaces its mass with a combination of the 2 fluids, and remains at the interface. For an object with simple geometry, this results in a single equilibrium position where the total mass of both fluids displaced is equal to the mass of the object.

Again, reality does not match your nonsense.

But seeing as you are on the deck
Nope.
Not in the examples I provided. The examples which show your claim to be nonsense. The examples you CANNOT explain.

The fact that you repeatedly need to appeal to objects on the floor, rather than address objects in general shows you cannot explain why things fall and that you know you can't.

How about this, I'll set up a situation, and you can describe the forces acting on an object:

You have an airtight cube.
At the very centre of the cube there is a ball.
There is air all around the ball.
What way does the ball move and why?
Then explain it with a ball that is less dense than air, without contradicting the previous explanation.

Note: The ball is not against the floor, so you CANNOT use it pushing against the floor as part of your explanation.
Pick something specific because I'm not quoting all of that.

?

#### bright

• 64
##### Re: Sea and air pressure
« Reply #44 on: June 04, 2020, 04:05:27 AM »
The weight is merely a man made measurement
No, it is very real and observable. Us being able to measure it doesn't magically mean it is man made.

Of course it's man made. It's a measurement of dense mass upon a man made scale to read numbered measurements of it, which is, as I said, measuring the resistance of the dense mas against atmospheric push upon it, resisted by the scale spring to give a reading.

So using your logic an object that is placed on a scale in a vacuum don't show any weight because there is no "atmospheric push" at that object. While in reality we do see that the object has weight in a vacuum. Can you explain how this is working then?

#### wise

• Professor
• Flat Earth Scientist
• 25519
• Soul Transformer
##### Re: Sea and air pressure
« Reply #45 on: June 04, 2020, 04:12:44 AM »
The weight is merely a man made measurement
No, it is very real and observable. Us being able to measure it doesn't magically mean it is man made.

Of course it's man made. It's a measurement of dense mass upon a man made scale to read numbered measurements of it, which is, as I said, measuring the resistance of the dense mas against atmospheric push upon it, resisted by the scale spring to give a reading.

So using your logic an object that is placed on a scale in a vacuum don't show any weight because there is no "atmospheric push" at that object. While in reality we do see that the object has weight in a vacuum. Can you explain how this is working then?
We do not see an object falls in vacuum. Theorically a real vacuum can't be exist. If you have one, please share.
1+2+3+...+∞= 1

Come on bro, just admit that the the earth isn't a sphere, you won't even be wrong

#### Timeisup

• 3890
• You still think that. You cannot be serious ?
##### Re: Sea and air pressure
« Reply #46 on: June 04, 2020, 05:19:47 AM »
Septicmatic claims that it is a small portion of air trapped inside which causes the height. That is why I referred to that.
The space left at the top of the tube has extreme expanded atmospheric gas. It is not a true vacuum as people perceive a true vacuum to be.
You cannot have free space devoid of anything.

It's this reason as to why the mercury can be pushed up the tube by the atmospheric pressure placed upon it, because the resistance of the mercury is minimal due to the gases inside being able to be compressed very very easily, as if...I  say " as if" there was no resistance, at all, which, as I've said, cannot be correct.

If you were to leave normal atmosphere inside the tube and fill it with mercury, the mercury would not be able to compress that more compact atmosphere and therefore will not give any meaningful reading for purpose...for obvious reasons.

Where is the proof for the things you say? I assume you have no way of determining the make-up of a vacuum unless you have an electron microscope in your back pocket and a means of producing a true vacuum, which I doubt.
"I can accept that some aspects of FE belief are true, while others are fiction."

Jack Black

Now that is a laugh!

?

#### bright

• 64
##### Re: Sea and air pressure
« Reply #47 on: June 04, 2020, 05:31:47 AM »
The weight is merely a man made measurement
No, it is very real and observable. Us being able to measure it doesn't magically mean it is man made.

Of course it's man made. It's a measurement of dense mass upon a man made scale to read numbered measurements of it, which is, as I said, measuring the resistance of the dense mas against atmospheric push upon it, resisted by the scale spring to give a reading.

So using your logic an object that is placed on a scale in a vacuum don't show any weight because there is no "atmospheric push" at that object. While in reality we do see that the object has weight in a vacuum. Can you explain how this is working then?
We do not see an object falls in vacuum. Theorically a real vacuum can't be exist. If you have one, please share.

I never said that the vacuum doesn't contains any air molecules. However I will write it in a different way.
When we have a weight of let's say 1 kilo and place this on a scale on a table the scale displays 1 kilo, right? Now we put this weight together with the scale into a chamber and remove as much air as possible from this chamber. Does the scale still shows 1 kilo or does it shows another value then 1 kilo?

#### JackBlack

• 22202
##### Re: Sea and air pressure
« Reply #48 on: June 04, 2020, 06:23:21 AM »
Pick something specific because I'm not quoting all of that.
I have done that before and you repeatedly refused, instead trying to distract away from the issue I raised. Or you offer an explanation but then refuse to acknowledge how that directly contradicts another explanation you have provided.
You seem to only ever want to discuss tiny parts because that way you can pretend you don't have a contradiction.

In fact, most of that is just pointing out the massive problem you have repeatedly overlooked when trying to provide an explanation for the directionality, the fact that your explanation only works when you are standing on the floor in the middle of an open space.

I have also repeatedly asked you for a single point, and you still haven't provided it.
EXPLAIN THE DIRECTIONALITY!
Explain why things fall.
Not just when they are sitting on the floor, but also if they are against a roof or against a wall, or in mid air.
That means no appealing the floor beneath their feet.

When you understand (from my side) how the atmosphere is stacked, then you'll understand why we are pushed/compressed to the solid deck.
It's been explained
You mean you have repeatedly failed to explain it and justify how it works in any sane way and instead need to leave it extreme vauge and handwavy because any attempt to rigorously define it or explain it leads you to direct contradictions?
The simplest evidence it isn't the atmosphere is the fact that weight is dependent upon mass, not area, and that air pressure is hydrostatic.
If it was the atmosphere pushing us down, then it would be based upon the area it pushes down, so a flat sheet of paper would weigh much more than a small steel cube, but the opposite is observed. And in addition, the weight of the paper would change between lying it down and standing it on its end.
So that rules that out.

We also know how atmospheric pressure behaves with it being hydrostatic.
That means it pushes in all directions, not just down. That means if you are against a wall, it would push into the wall. If you are against the roof, it would push you into the roof. And if you were in mid-air, there would be no significant net force on you.
So that means you need to rule out the atmosphere going sideways, which is observed with a simple breeze.
So yet again ruling out your model.

But ignoring that, if it was magically stacking and not going sideways, then what happens inside vs outside?
Inside you have a roof above your head blocking the vast majority of the atmosphere while outside you have nothing to protect you from the 10 000 kg per m^2. Your weight should change dramatically.
The only way for it to not is if the roof somehow participated in the stack, with it supporting the stack of air above, and transferring its weight to the stack below. But that would then mean that it is floating on the stack rather than getting pushed down. And there is nothing special about a roof and it should happen to all objects, meaning objects should float.
So again, your model is ruled out.

This should be further emphasised by using a vacuum chamber, which not only shields from the atmospheric stack above, but also has less dense atmosphere inside, so less to push down.
So again, your model is ruled out.

The only other option is to have everything be porous and just allow air straight though, but that would preclude having airtight containers of which there are plenty. It would also mean a wall would do nothing to stop the wind.
So again, your model is ruled out.

A specific example of that is a mercury barometer. That relies upon the void and the top being shielded from the air pressure by the tube. If the air could penetrate through the glass then the mercury would be pushed down until it was level. There would be no height difference.
So again, your model is ruled out.

Another issue is that if you have the air pressure pushing objects down, you can't then turn around and also have it responsible for pushing objects upwards.
That means helium filled balloons should also be pushed down.
So again, your model is ruled out.

And of course, you have no explanation for why the atmosphere stacks in the first place.

So no, it doesn't require that people want to understand it.
Instead it requires people to just blindly accept it without thinking, as even thinking about it for a short time reveals so many problems with it.

It isn't that we don't want to understand, it is that your model simply cannot match reality, and rather than attempt to explain it you just insult us.

But reality does explain why air "stacks". It is the very same reason objects fall.
GRAVITY!
Gravity pulls objects down towards Earth, including any fluid (which includes the air), which compresses and pressurises as it gets lower and lower. This is directly measurable, both by measuring the density of air and by measuring the air pressure or the pressure of a fluid.
This gravity also pulls other objects like us down.
But the fluid pressure increasing as you go down means the air will provide an upwards force as the pressure below is greater than the pressure above, with a force equal to the acceleration due to gravity multiplied by the mass of fluid displaced.
That means the measured weight of an object will be reduced by the mass of the fluid it has displaced and if it is less dense than the fluid, it will rise.

So is it really a surprise that people don't accept your nonsense when it can't explain reality and we have a perfectly good explanation which doesn't require throwing out basically all of science?

The atmosphere above you is not identical to below your feel.
Your feet are on the deck so there is little atmosphere under your feet but plenty around you and plenty above you
Again, you repeatedly appealing to feet being on the deck shows you CANNOT explain it.
As I have pointed out, that is not always the case.
Some times objects are against a wall. In that case there is little atmosphere between the wall and the object, but plenty around it. So why is the object not pushed into the wall? Why does it still fall down?
Some times objects are against a roof. In that case there is little atmosphere between the roof and the object, but plenty around and below it. So why is the object not pushed up into the roof? Why does it still fall down?
Some times objects are in mid air. In that case there is air all around. So why does it still fall down?

Again, can you explain why things fall down (rather than up or sideways or not at all), WITHOUT APPEALING TO WHAT IS BELOW YOUR FEET?

We do not see an object falls in vacuum. Theorically a real vacuum can't be exist. If you have one, please share.
You mean a perfect or ideal vacuum can't exist.
Real vacuums can and do exist.

They are not completely devoid of air or matter, but have so little it is practically nothing.
Even a fairly simple vacuum chamber can get down to 1/100th of at atmosphere, so an object should weigh roughly 1/100th of what it normally does, and fall at 1/100th of the rate (acceleration). Instead they are observed to weight slightly more, and fall at the same rate in the case of dense objects and faster in the case of quite light or poorly aerodynamic objects.

Meanwhile, high vacuum systems can easily get to 1 trillionth of an atmosphere. Yet things still weigh basically the same.

#### sceptimatic

• Flat Earth Scientist
• 30068
##### Re: Sea and air pressure
« Reply #49 on: June 04, 2020, 07:23:39 AM »
The weight is merely a man made measurement
No, it is very real and observable. Us being able to measure it doesn't magically mean it is man made.

Of course it's man made. It's a measurement of dense mass upon a man made scale to read numbered measurements of it, which is, as I said, measuring the resistance of the dense mas against atmospheric push upon it, resisted by the scale spring to give a reading.

So using your logic an object that is placed on a scale in a vacuum don't show any weight because there is no "atmospheric push" at that object. While in reality we do see that the object has weight in a vacuum. Can you explain how this is working then?
It all cancels out, even when subjected to extreme low pressure, because scales would be subjected to the same resistant force, or lack of, to measure.

#### sceptimatic

• Flat Earth Scientist
• 30068
##### Re: Sea and air pressure
« Reply #50 on: June 04, 2020, 07:28:06 AM »
Where is the proof for the things you say? I assume you have no way of determining the make-up of a vacuum unless you have an electron microscope in your back pocket and a means of producing a true vacuum, which I doubt.
I can only prove it to myself. I can't make anyone else see my proof but I can ask anyone to apply their own logic without using gravity bias, or a spherical Earth indoctrinated narrative.

No microscope will prove anything to anyone in terms of atmosphere, because you have to look through atmosphere to be able to discern anything of matter, within it.

#### sceptimatic

• Flat Earth Scientist
• 30068
##### Re: Sea and air pressure
« Reply #51 on: June 04, 2020, 07:41:58 AM »
The atmosphere above you is not identical to below your feel.
Your feet are on the deck so there is little atmosphere under your feet but plenty around you and plenty above you
Again, you repeatedly appealing to feet being on the deck shows you CANNOT explain it.
As I have pointed out, that is not always the case.
Some times objects are against a wall. In that case there is little atmosphere between the wall and the object, but plenty around it. So why is the object not pushed into the wall? Why does it still fall down?
Some times objects are against a roof. In that case there is little atmosphere between the roof and the object, but plenty around and below it. So why is the object not pushed up into the roof? Why does it still fall down?
Some times objects are in mid air. In that case there is air all around. So why does it still fall down?

Again, can you explain why things fall down (rather than up or sideways or not at all), WITHOUT APPEALING TO WHAT IS BELOW YOUR FEET?

Horizontal atmosphere will still surround you whether you're out in the open or against a wall.
The key to it all is what's above....directly above you.

Your dense body is still pushing away the atmosphere horizontally, all around you and if you stand against a wall, the wall is just a dense barrier that allows your body to push the atmosphere around the rest of you.
However, above you the atmosphere is still pushing you down onto your head and shoulders because you push into that stacked height.

?

#### bright

• 64
##### Re: Sea and air pressure
« Reply #52 on: June 04, 2020, 07:49:46 AM »
The weight is merely a man made measurement
No, it is very real and observable. Us being able to measure it doesn't magically mean it is man made.

Of course it's man made. It's a measurement of dense mass upon a man made scale to read numbered measurements of it, which is, as I said, measuring the resistance of the dense mas against atmospheric push upon it, resisted by the scale spring to give a reading.

So using your logic an object that is placed on a scale in a vacuum don't show any weight because there is no "atmospheric push" at that object. While in reality we do see that the object has weight in a vacuum. Can you explain how this is working then?
It all cancels out, even when subjected to extreme low pressure, because scales would be subjected to the same resistant force, or lack of, to measure.

This isn't logic at all. If the spring in the scale has less resistance in the vacuum then this spring is pushing more upwards then the force of the weight that is place on the scale due to the lack of air. I have never seen a spring that has a different resilience in normal pressure compared in a vacuum.

#### sceptimatic

• Flat Earth Scientist
• 30068
##### Re: Sea and air pressure
« Reply #53 on: June 04, 2020, 07:56:38 AM »
The weight is merely a man made measurement
No, it is very real and observable. Us being able to measure it doesn't magically mean it is man made.

Of course it's man made. It's a measurement of dense mass upon a man made scale to read numbered measurements of it, which is, as I said, measuring the resistance of the dense mas against atmospheric push upon it, resisted by the scale spring to give a reading.

So using your logic an object that is placed on a scale in a vacuum don't show any weight because there is no "atmospheric push" at that object. While in reality we do see that the object has weight in a vacuum. Can you explain how this is working then?
It all cancels out, even when subjected to extreme low pressure, because scales would be subjected to the same resistant force, or lack of, to measure.

This isn't logic at all. If the spring in the scale has less resistance in the vacuum then this spring is pushing more upwards then the force of the weight that is place on the scale due to the lack of air. I have never seen a spring that has a different resilience in normal pressure compared in a vacuum.
Porosity of any dense mass in a lower pressure will change volume to suit the surrounding.
This is why there would be minimal, if any change.
Externally there would be minimal change in terms of using an evacuation chamber and external scales.

#### JackBlack

• 22202
##### Re: Sea and air pressure
« Reply #54 on: June 04, 2020, 03:02:12 PM »
Horizontal atmosphere will still surround you whether you're out in the open or against a wall.
How? There is literally a wall to the side. That could not only be a thin wall, but also the inside of a bunker, with km and km of Earth against the side.
How is their air magically on that side, but not under me?
And again, when you are in mid air, the air is surrounding you, no doubt about that.
In any case, in these situations you are yet to explain, there is always air below.

The key to it all is what's above....directly above you.
You mean like in the case where you have a roof directly above you, yet you are still pushed down, clearly indicating it isn't?

However, above you the atmosphere is still pushing you down onto your head and shoulders because you push into that stacked height.
Why?
Why is it magically always pushing down, even when you are against a wall or against the roof, or in mid air?
Why are you only ever magically pushing up into the stacked height? Why never sideways or down?

Perhaps more importantly, HOW are you pushing into that stacked height, when you have nothing other than air directly below you?
What are you pushing off, the air in the stack below?

Does that mean all your appeals to "your feet on the deck" were completely wrong?

This is what you have repeatedly avoided explaining. It means you have no basis for your directionality at all. All you have is a baseless assertion that the atmosphere magically pushes you down for no reason at all, in a manner fundamentally inconsistent with how the atmosphere actually works as demonstrated by countless experiments.

It all cancels out, even when subjected to extreme low pressure, because scales would be subjected to the same resistant force, or lack of, to measure.
Scales are not the only way to measure it. We can also directly observe the object falling.
But even using scales is fine. That is because scales are not magically balanced with the atmosphere.
They do not use the atmosphere to measure.

I can only prove it to myself.
Yes, because you have no proof at all and instead need to outright reject so much of reality.
You are unable to provide anything to support your claims or to challenge reality.

Porosity of any dense mass in a lower pressure will change volume to suit the surrounding.
This is why there would be minimal, if any change.
Externally there would be minimal change in terms of using an evacuation chamber and external scales.
So now you are saying it isn't the spring, instead the object itself magically changes volume to maintain basically the same weight?
And what magic causes that and why is no change in the volume visible?

Notice how you expect people to reject what is shown with actual evidence, while you provide wild speculation with no evidence at all in its place?

#### sceptimatic

• Flat Earth Scientist
• 30068
##### Re: Sea and air pressure
« Reply #55 on: June 04, 2020, 10:57:13 PM »
Horizontal atmosphere will still surround you whether you're out in the open or against a wall.
How? There is literally a wall to the side.
You're still surrounded and the wall is just a barrier for your body that is against it.
It's like being in a swimming pool. You can stand next to the side but you're still surrounded by the exact same amount of water.

Quote from: JackBlack
That could not only be a thin wall, but also the inside of a bunker, with km and km of Earth against the side.
It doesn't matter what it is. Like the swimming pool, you're still surrounded.

Quote from: JackBlack
How is their air magically on that side, but not under me?
Air will be under you but in tiny amounts under your feet inside more solid matter but it will be minimal compared to what's above you, directly because solid matter takes up much of the space you have underfoot.

Quote from: JackBlack
And again, when you are in mid air, the air is surrounding you, no doubt about that.

When you're in midair you have to have a force to keep you in midair, meaning you have to compress the atmosphere under you to ensure your mass stays in the air.

#### sceptimatic

• Flat Earth Scientist
• 30068
##### Re: Sea and air pressure
« Reply #56 on: June 04, 2020, 11:00:48 PM »
The key to it all is what's above....directly above you.
You mean like in the case where you have a roof directly above you, yet you are still pushed down, clearly indicating it isn't?
The roof has more mass of molecules under it and within the porosity of the materials in it. It's more or less equalised and then there's the air inside that building you are in, surrounding you, so you're still under pressure.

#### Timeisup

• 3890
• You still think that. You cannot be serious ?
##### Re: Sea and air pressure
« Reply #57 on: June 04, 2020, 11:07:17 PM »
The key to it all is what's above....directly above you.
You mean like in the case where you have a roof directly above you, yet you are still pushed down, clearly indicating it isn't?
The roof has more mass of molecules under it and within the porosity of the materials in it. It's more or less equalised and then there's the air inside that building you are in, surrounding you, so you're still under pressure.

How do you know that? Have you personally seen the molecules? If not then you are just speculating rather than knowing for sure. Claiming materials are porous when you have no proof is again speculation, speculation that is wrong.
Do you personally have an electron  microscope?
"I can accept that some aspects of FE belief are true, while others are fiction."

Jack Black

Now that is a laugh!

#### sceptimatic

• Flat Earth Scientist
• 30068
##### Re: Sea and air pressure
« Reply #58 on: June 04, 2020, 11:08:47 PM »
Quote from: JackBlack
However, above you the atmosphere is still pushing you down onto your head and shoulders because you push into that stacked height.
Why?
Why is it magically always pushing down, even when you are against a wall or against the roof, or in mid air?
If you were stood under a swimming pool and were acclimatised to it like a bottom feeding sea creature, you can use your imagination to answer your questions.
Quote from: JackBlack
Why are you only ever magically pushing up into the stacked height? Why never sideways or down?
You are pushing in all directions.
Above you, you push into the stacks by your own dense mass and what you push away is pushing right back at you as well as what is stacked above and around.
Your feet are pushing against the deck because your body is under that pressure, which means your feet are a resistance to all of that pressure above and around, with minimal atmosphere underfoot because it's mainly a solid resistance.
Surely you can grasp this.

#### sceptimatic

• Flat Earth Scientist
• 30068
##### Re: Sea and air pressure
« Reply #59 on: June 04, 2020, 11:12:08 PM »
The key to it all is what's above....directly above you.
You mean like in the case where you have a roof directly above you, yet you are still pushed down, clearly indicating it isn't?
The roof has more mass of molecules under it and within the porosity of the materials in it. It's more or less equalised and then there's the air inside that building you are in, surrounding you, so you're still under pressure.

How do you know that? Have you personally seen the molecules? If not then you are just speculating rather than knowing for sure. Claiming materials are porous when you have no proof is again speculation, speculation that is wrong.
Do you personally have an electron  microscope?
How do you know what you know?
How do you know what gravity is?
How do you know most things you've never physically experienced?

I have my theories or hypotheses or thoughts by observing and feeling what is around me.
I see things in a different way to what I'm told.

If you don't want to think on that or have me down as a nut case, then do so but don't waste any effort on reminding me too much, unless you're willing to put some effort into understanding my side.