Sea and air pressure

  • 1282 Replies
  • 123705 Views
*

Stash

  • Ethical Stash
  • 13398
  • I am car!
Re: Sea and air pressure
« Reply #600 on: September 24, 2020, 11:46:28 PM »

Quote from: Stash

Quote from: Stash

 And we all know pressure pushes in on an object from all sides.
Yep, apart from underneath, which is resistance to mass against the pressure around and above..

Why apart from underneath? We know that submerged in water, pressure is even on an object from all directions, including from below. Why is the atmosphere different?
The atmosphere is not different. It performs in the same way....it's just understanding why it performs like it does, which comes back to the stacking system.

I I asked you to stack blocks full of air up to 50 foot high, for instance, you can appreciate the bottom block is using the ground as its foundation to resist the blocks above....right?
The block directly above the foundation block is using that block as resistance to the blocks above that....and so on.

Sure.

That's a basic stack but if we were to do that along a mass horizontal and then up and used air balls, for instance and you were to come up from the ground and push those air balls out of the way....you've displaced them by using the ground to allow you to do it and not have them crush you back into it from all angles.

I have no idea what this "air ball" word salad is supposed to convey. You need more diagrams. Your words may mean something to you, but they don't to anyone else. And that's the whole point right, for anyone with a theory, be able to explain it so that others understand. Otherwise, what's the point of having a theory?

*

Stash

  • Ethical Stash
  • 13398
  • I am car!
Re: Sea and air pressure
« Reply #601 on: September 24, 2020, 11:52:28 PM »



Quote from: Stash


Here's an overlap scenario:



Are there two separate stacks, one for the Blue KG and one for the Orange KG? If so, how does the atmosphere know to create two distinct and separate stacks?

In that scenario the top block becomes part of the bottom.It's a stack in  itself within the stacking system of the atmosphere....so,if you were to measure that displacement on a scale plate,you have two dense masses using that scale plate to push into that stack and above that stack.

Ok, so the two separate KG stacks become one stack as soon as they are 'combined', overlapping, as in the diagram. What about the over hang in the overlap diagram? That KG (orange) is not using all of its foundation to push back against the newly formed single stack. Would the blue and orange KG boxes weigh less combined in that configuration than if the orange KG was stacked directly on top of the blue, inline?

*

Stash

  • Ethical Stash
  • 13398
  • I am car!
Re: Sea and air pressure
« Reply #602 on: September 24, 2020, 11:53:19 PM »
Quote from: Stash
Or is it one stack for both? And if so, what if you were to place a 2x4 leaning against the side of the Orange KG, would it now be part of the both the Blue and Orange stack?

If you were to lean something against one mass then you would create a small amount of extra mass displacement of atmosphere along with it but most of it would be channelled down to the foundation that 4x2 is using for that lean.

If you don't get what I'm saying, make the scenario a bit different so I can explain it better

I'll mock something up to make my question clearer.

*

Stash

  • Ethical Stash
  • 13398
  • I am car!
Re: Sea and air pressure
« Reply #603 on: September 25, 2020, 12:17:48 AM »
Quote from: Stash
The mystery here is how does the atmosphere know to only create a stack column directly above an object?
The stacking system is throughout from bottom to top.
The mass of any object placed within it...let's say a square box submerged up to its top. This would be known as sitting in the stack and displacing the atmosphere around it.This displaced atmosphere has to go somewhere, just like the displaced water in a pool an object is in, has to go somewhere.
Where?
Naturally you can say, it rises....it goes up.
So, not only do you have that excess push up, you also has that atmosphere directly above the object, anyway, right up to the point of where the stacking system, ends...which is in extreme low pressure at that top...which we don't need to delve into, yet. (dome).

Quote from: Stash
What is telling the atmosphere to make that very specific and finite delineation? How does it know when to combine stacks and when not to? It's almost like the the atmosphere knows something we don't.
No its not. If you seriously pay attention you won't need to keep saying this.

You're going wrong right at the start, it's that simple.  I challenge you to measure the expansion and contraction of a pair of natural gas canisters as pictured in that seesaw as they equalize pression. Use any equipment you want, but you are not going to measure any change at all. If you see a pressure container visibly expanding you better run like hell!  :o

Do you run when you see a balloon expanding?
A football?
They're all pressure containers.
But then again you're referring to steel containers and such like....right?
And you'll understand that I said you would not visually see expansion and contraction.....right...if you've paid attention, which, it seems, you have not..

Kind of a combined answer as your two responses relate.

Using the steel containers metaphor. Your displacement explanation does not work in this scenario. The expansion/contraction of the steel tanks is imperceptible and immeasurable. Unlike a balloon or football. So don't go all apples and oranges here.

The displacement of the 'expanding' steel tank is equivalent to me sticking my fist into an Olympic sized swimming pool and expecting any sort of relevant displacement to occur. Worse still, you're talking not about a swimming pool but the entire atmosphere of the planet being displaced by gas flowing from one non-maleable 5 gallon tank to another.

So no, the atmosphere, the stack, what have you, has no knowledge that gas is moving between the tanks and therefore, cannot apply any displaced atmospheric pressure on either of the them. The 'stacks' above each tank are completely ignorant/agnostic to what is transpiring between the two. Yet the weights change and one tank becomes lighter and one heavier.

So in this scenario, DenPressure, and its atmospheric displacing stack system does not work.

*

sceptimatic

  • Flat Earth Scientist
  • 30059
Re: Sea and air pressure
« Reply #604 on: September 25, 2020, 12:19:05 AM »
The entire body of the atmosphere is one big glob of a 'stack' inside the cell (under the dome). How does it create individual stacks assigned to each and every object on earth?
It doesn't. The objects themselves create the displacement of the stack they are in or placed in at that point.
For instance, if you move a boulder from one point to another point on the ground, the displaced atmosphere the boulder was in now fills the gap at that point but is now displaced at the next point.

Quote from: Stash

 And all objects are already in the atmosphere. Already displacing. Objects just get moved around and the assigned stack to that object follows it. You said before nothing new gets introduced into the atmosphere.
 Everything is already in it. When we were talking about organic growth of objects.

Everything is part of it. it's all in a cell....but if you want to measure mass you need to bring it to a resistant scale, whether it's a stone on the ground or a nugget of gold dug from under it.

Quote from: Stash

 If I smash a boulder into a pile of individual rocks, a stack is created for each rock, but the displacement of the boulder prior to being smashed is the same as the pile of rocks after being smashed?
If you smash a boulder that was already displacing it's own dense mass of atmosphere, then you change that individuaL dense mass into smaller individual dense masses which displace their own amount of atmosphere on their own foundation points.

Place them all on one foundation resistance, like a scale plate and you can measure the entire displacement,meaning it would match the boulder measure before it was smashed.


*

sceptimatic

  • Flat Earth Scientist
  • 30059
Re: Sea and air pressure
« Reply #605 on: September 25, 2020, 12:22:53 AM »



Quote from: Stash


Here's an overlap scenario:



Are there two separate stacks, one for the Blue KG and one for the Orange KG? If so, how does the atmosphere know to create two distinct and separate stacks?

In that scenario the top block becomes part of the bottom.It's a stack in  itself within the stacking system of the atmosphere....so,if you were to measure that displacement on a scale plate,you have two dense masses using that scale plate to push into that stack and above that stack.

Ok, so the two separate KG stacks become one stack as soon as they are 'combined', overlapping, as in the diagram. What about the over hang in the overlap diagram? That KG (orange) is not using all of its foundation to push back against the newly formed single stack. Would the blue and orange KG boxes weigh less combined in that configuration than if the orange KG was stacked directly on top of the blue, inline?
No, because the block above transfers the displacement to another point and leaves the gap to be atmospherically filled.

*

sceptimatic

  • Flat Earth Scientist
  • 30059
Re: Sea and air pressure
« Reply #606 on: September 25, 2020, 12:25:41 AM »


I have no idea what this "air ball" word salad is supposed to convey. You need more diagrams. Your words may mean something to you, but they don't to anyone else. And that's the whole point right, for anyone with a theory, be able to explain it so that others understand. Otherwise, what's the point of having a theory?
Yes you do. You know what a ball full of air is and I'm trying to help you but you're refusing to go with analogies.
I appreciate you might not know my mindset but it's not hard to follow the basics.
Maybe release your global mindset a bit and you might start to get a more clearer outlook.

*

Stash

  • Ethical Stash
  • 13398
  • I am car!
Re: Sea and air pressure
« Reply #607 on: September 25, 2020, 12:44:43 AM »


I have no idea what this "air ball" word salad is supposed to convey. You need more diagrams. Your words may mean something to you, but they don't to anyone else. And that's the whole point right, for anyone with a theory, be able to explain it so that others understand. Otherwise, what's the point of having a theory?
Yes you do. You know what a ball full of air is and I'm trying to help you but you're refusing to go with analogies.
I appreciate you might not know my mindset but it's not hard to follow the basics.
Maybe release your global mindset a bit and you might start to get a more clearer outlook.

It has nothing to do with releasing a global mindset. That's where you're wrong and your arrogance gets in the way. I'm not even thinking of a globe or gravity, or whatever. Like I said, you may think your use of language is exemplary in conveying what you are thinking, but it's not. That's why diagrams help a tremulous amount.

Re: Sea and air pressure
« Reply #608 on: September 25, 2020, 01:26:43 AM »
Quote from: Themightykabool



Your weight pushes down.
The net force (weight minus buyancy) wiuld determine which direction you move.
In this example the water, a fluid, takes the displsced density of the object and acts independtly to whatever surface its pushing on.

Lets say the obect was a boat with an anchor on a rope.
The rope hangs below the boat, pushed up by the water.
The boat is floating, pushed up by the same water.
But the stacked water below the rope is not pushes on the rope and the boat togethers, so that you would seee the rope buckle.
It is not a linearly transferred force line.

This is in a sense opppsite to the "hair on head pushed down" question.

Now note
The buoyancy force is "up" - opposite to the weight.
Fluid pressure decreases the higher you go.
Air pressure decreases the higher you go.
Hot air and helium balloons float in air just like the boat in water.

So unfortunately you need to answer jackBs never answrred question - why down?!!!
You've just answered the question of why down, in bold.

You are already a bottom feeder. You are at ground level against upper atmosphere. You are under the biggest pressure at ground level.
That's what keeps your mass down....by displacement.
The question has more than been answered but if you want to carry on asking then feel free but you'll get the same answers.
You and others are the one's that take this stuff around in circles because you seriously fail to understand and you do it because you revert to your own accepted model...which is fine for you but it doesn't help you understand mine.

You fail to grasp the effect.
The effect is that the water pressure pushes things UP.
Not down.
So why in air is it down, not up (even thougg we see the same effect when using hot air or helium balloons)?

*

JackBlack

  • 21560
Re: Sea and air pressure
« Reply #609 on: September 25, 2020, 02:25:17 AM »
Nope. It's been explained.
No, it hasn't.
You can claim it has all you want, but it wont magically make all the problems with your model vanish.
Yet again you have ignored the contradiction between the scale and the pressure gauge, and between the scale with the 1 kg weight and the newly introduced 1 kg weight.

Quote from: Stash

 And we all know pressure pushes in on an object from all sides.
Yep, apart from underneath, which is resistance to mass against the pressure around and above.
No, we (as in the vast majority of the world) know that air pushes objects from all directions, including from below.
This is how a suction cup attached to the ceiling works, with air pressure pushing the suction cup up to hold it in place.
It is also how a suction cup used to lift something works, with the air pressure pushing on the object below, keeping it attached to the suction cup.
It is also how buoyancy works, with the air (or liquid) pressure below the object, which is greater than that above, pushing the object up.

So no, we know it pushes up from below.
On the other hand, you reject it because it means your model is nonsense, except when you are confronted by something which requires it to do so at which point you contradict yourself and claim that air now does push up.

Scenario
The hair on my head isnt pushed down by the entire force of the stack which pushes my body down.
Each individual hair displaces it's own dense mass of atmosphere. How much do you think each hair will displace?
Very little for each.
Your head, shoulders and body displace quite a lot.
It shocks me how far back you end up going, in trying to understand what I'm saying. I hope you're doing it deliberately, to be fair.
See, this is why you should have provided a diagram.
From your diagram, the only place the air pushes the object down is the top.
That means the air, at a the top of a person, or the top of a stack of objects, needs to push down with all the force.

In your model, it isn't a case of how much that 1 hair displaces, it is a case of how much that 1 hair and everything below it displaces.

This is the same problem you have avoided many times.
So no, it isn't us going so far back, it is your model going so far back.
The problem isn't with us, it is with you and your model.
You start with a basic "explanation", but then up pops a problem which destroys your model as it doesn't match the "explanation" provided and requires you to contradict yourself, putting it back to square 1.

So like I asked, care to provide a diagram of how the air acts on a stack of objects? Clearly indicating where the force is applied by the air to the stack/each object in the stack?

Because in order to match reality, the air needs to penetrate every object and apply force to each little bit of matter in the stack, proportional to its mass.
i.e. it needs to behave in a manner completely inconsistent with how air behaves.
Get back to me when you want to understand.
And how about you stop with the ad hom's and actually address the multitude of problems in your model?
My participation and responding to your claims and using your own "explanations" against you make it quite clear that I do understand and want to.
So how about you actually justify your model or admit you can't?
If you think I am not understanding, then actually explain, actually address the issues, address the "apparent" contradictions.
If you can't, stop acting like I'm the problem just because I can show problems with your model.

All the issues still remain, completely unaddressed, showing your model to be nonsense.

Quote from: Stash

Quote from: Stash

 And we all know pressure pushes in on an object from all sides.
Yep, apart from underneath, which is resistance to mass against the pressure around and above..

Why apart from underneath? We know that submerged in water, pressure is even on an object from all directions, including from below. Why is the atmosphere different?
The atmosphere is not different. It performs in the same way
Does that mean you accept the atmosphere pushing from below as well and the overall effect is a small upwards force, not weight?

I I asked you to stack blocks full of air up to 50 foot high, for instance, you can appreciate the bottom block is using the ground as its foundation to resist the blocks above....right?
The block directly above the foundation block is using that block as resistance to the blocks above that....and so on.
That's a basic stack but if we were to do that along a mass horizontal and then up and used air balls, for instance and you were to come up from the ground and push those air balls out of the way....you've displaced them by using the ground to allow you to do it and not have them crush you back into it from all angles.
Why switch from blocks to balls?
If there are blocks pushed up against a wall, it will have a similar resistance to those stacked from the ground.
In fact, even if they were stacked up against a roof, being pushed to the roof the same applies.
Other than the objects having something make them go down (which is clearly not the air), down is not special.

And what happens if you place a scale between the 2? Does it measure the full force?

In that scenario the top block becomes part of the bottom.It's a stack in  itself within the stacking system of the atmosphere....so,if you were to measure that displacement on a scale plate,you have two dense masses using that scale plate to push into that stack and above that stack.
So what you are saying is that the hair on a person's head and that person is the same object with the same stack above and thus the air pushes down on the hair as part of the person?

Fluid pressure decreases the higher you go.
Air pressure decreases the higher you go.
You've just answered the question of why down, in bold.
[/quote]
Really?
So you are claiming things are pushed from a region of low pressure to a region of high pressure?
So why then if you have a piston in a cylinder with a high pressure inside, does it push away from the high pressure towards the low pressure?

It would only be answered in bold if you were pushed up.
And this is also how the atmosphere and other fluids are observed to behave. They apply a force to the object based upon that pressure gradient in an upwards direction. That is buoyancy.

*

sceptimatic

  • Flat Earth Scientist
  • 30059
Re: Sea and air pressure
« Reply #610 on: September 25, 2020, 02:30:44 AM »
Kind of a combined answer as your two responses relate.

Using the steel containers metaphor. Your displacement explanation does not work in this scenario. The expansion/contraction of the steel tanks is imperceptible and immeasurable. Unlike a balloon or football. So don't go all apples and oranges here.
It may seem like apples and oranges but it is far from it.It just requires though into what I'm saying.
The train iron tyre should give you a massive clue as to steel expansion and contraction.
Every action must have an equal and opposite reaction somewhere. It has to.
You only get out of something what you put into it and that's another clue to it.


Quote from: Stash

The displacement of the 'expanding' steel tank is equivalent to me sticking my fist into an Olympic sized swimming pool and expecting any sort of relevant displacement to occur. Worse still, you're talking not about a swimming pool but the entire atmosphere of the planet flattish Earth dome being displaced by gas flowing from one non-maleable 5 gallon tank to another.
You're simply not looking at it from my point; you're making your own point and omitting the rest.

Your fist is already in the pool. It now about what your fist has to do in that pool, such as hold another mass. By holding another mass in your fist, your fist has to squeeze and by squeezing....your fist has to expand to keep hold of the mass.
This is your tank holding a mass. The mass comes directly from Earth. It was already there and you have forced it into a tank and that tank, in order to hold it....has to be strong enough to expand, just like the iron tyre does to fit on a train wheel.
Because you don't see this expansion and contraction, naturally you think it's not there.
Now you can ponder as to the expansion being a nothing when put against the atmosphere but you must know that to get all of that mass into the tank, you have to take all that mass from the Earth and FORCE it in.
How much force is required to do that? It's not a nothing.....is it?

Quote from: Stash

So no, the atmosphere, the stack, what have you, has no knowledge that gas is moving between the tanks and therefore, cannot apply any displaced atmospheric pressure on either of the them. The 'stacks' above each tank are completely ignorant/agnostic to what is transpiring between the two. Yet the weights change and one tank becomes lighter and one heavier.

So in this scenario, DenPressure, and its atmospheric displacing stack system does not work.
It absolutely does but you can't understand it from my side.

*

sceptimatic

  • Flat Earth Scientist
  • 30059
Re: Sea and air pressure
« Reply #611 on: September 25, 2020, 02:32:20 AM »


I have no idea what this "air ball" word salad is supposed to convey. You need more diagrams. Your words may mean something to you, but they don't to anyone else. And that's the whole point right, for anyone with a theory, be able to explain it so that others understand. Otherwise, what's the point of having a theory?
Yes you do. You know what a ball full of air is and I'm trying to help you but you're refusing to go with analogies.
I appreciate you might not know my mindset but it's not hard to follow the basics.
Maybe release your global mindset a bit and you might start to get a more clearer outlook.

It has nothing to do with releasing a global mindset. That's where you're wrong and your arrogance gets in the way. I'm not even thinking of a globe or gravity, or whatever. Like I said, you may think your use of language is exemplary in conveying what you are thinking, but it's not. That's why diagrams help a tremulous amount.
I think arrogance can be two ways, so don't be coming that nonsense.
Let's deal with your issues and not get into a tit for tat.
We can do that in angry ranting if you need to let off steam...or pm me and let off steam.

*

sceptimatic

  • Flat Earth Scientist
  • 30059
Re: Sea and air pressure
« Reply #612 on: September 25, 2020, 02:38:42 AM »

You fail to grasp the effect.
The effect is that the water pressure pushes things UP.
Not down.

Water pressure only pushes things up if those things are less dense than the water they are in. They get crushed up, not from below but from all around, which pushes into the stack below as a dense resistance.


Quote from: Themightykabool
So why in air is it down, not up (even thougg we see the same effect when using hot air or helium balloons)?
Helium balloons are less dense, just like I explained with the water.
They get crushed up because their mass is less dense than the atmosphere they are placed in by force and once that force is released, they are crushed up to where their mass is relevant in the stacking system.

*

sceptimatic

  • Flat Earth Scientist
  • 30059
Re: Sea and air pressure
« Reply #613 on: September 25, 2020, 02:42:53 AM »

So you are claiming things are pushed from a region of low pressure to a region of high pressure?
So why then if you have a piston in a cylinder with a high pressure inside, does it push away from the high pressure towards the low pressure?

It would only be answered in bold if you were pushed up.
And this is also how the atmosphere and other fluids are observed to behave. They apply a force to the object based upon that pressure gradient in an upwards direction. That is buoyancy.
You do yourself no favours playing this game.

Re: Sea and air pressure
« Reply #614 on: September 25, 2020, 04:21:30 AM »

You fail to grasp the effect.
The effect is that the water pressure pushes things UP.
Not down.

Water pressure only pushes things up if those things are less dense than the water they are in. They get crushed up, not from below but from all around, which pushes into the stack below as a dense resistance.


Quote from: Themightykabool
So why in air is it down, not up (even thougg we see the same effect when using hot air or helium balloons)?
Helium balloons are less dense, just like I explained with the water.
They get crushed up because their mass is less dense than the atmosphere they are placed in by force and once that force is released, they are crushed up to where their mass is relevant in the stacking system.

And "nearly nothing" is less desne than helium, causing the balloon too fall.
Proving against your theory.


*

sceptimatic

  • Flat Earth Scientist
  • 30059
Re: Sea and air pressure
« Reply #615 on: September 25, 2020, 04:24:59 AM »

You fail to grasp the effect.
The effect is that the water pressure pushes things UP.
Not down.

Water pressure only pushes things up if those things are less dense than the water they are in. They get crushed up, not from below but from all around, which pushes into the stack below as a dense resistance.


Quote from: Themightykabool
So why in air is it down, not up (even thougg we see the same effect when using hot air or helium balloons)?
Helium balloons are less dense, just like I explained with the water.
They get crushed up because their mass is less dense than the atmosphere they are placed in by force and once that force is released, they are crushed up to where their mass is relevant in the stacking system.

And "nearly nothing" is less desne than helium, causing the balloon too fall.
Proving against your theory.


It proves my theory, not disproves it.
The helium and balloon become more dense than the lesser atmosphere which cannot squeeze it up, anymore.




Re: Sea and air pressure
« Reply #616 on: September 25, 2020, 05:37:48 AM »
Ok yes ill concede your statement i read incorrectly.


Re: Sea and air pressure
« Reply #617 on: September 25, 2020, 05:38:52 AM »
So what pushed the balloon down?

*

JJA

  • 6869
  • Math is math!
Re: Sea and air pressure
« Reply #618 on: September 25, 2020, 06:06:32 AM »
You're going wrong right at the start, it's that simple.  I challenge you to measure the expansion and contraction of a pair of natural gas canisters as pictured in that seesaw as they equalize pression. Use any equipment you want, but you are not going to measure any change at all. If you see a pressure container visibly expanding you better run like hell!  :o

Do you run when you see a balloon expanding?
A football?
They're all pressure containers.
But then again you're referring to steel containers and such like....right?
And you'll understand that I said you would not visually see expansion and contraction.....right...if you've paid attention, which, it seems, you have not..

Of course I'm talking about steel pressure containers. Have you forgotten the sea-saw with the two natural gas containers already?

They don't visibly expand, they don't expand in any easily measurable way at all.

Yet these air stacks magically know to stop pressing down when gas from one passes to the other.

*

sceptimatic

  • Flat Earth Scientist
  • 30059
Re: Sea and air pressure
« Reply #619 on: September 25, 2020, 06:37:08 AM »
So what pushed the balloon down?
The air above, as thin as it is, it is the addition to the dense mass of the balloon and gas against the thin resistant stack trying to stop that dense mass.

It's alway s a push on push.
A squeeze on the stack anything is immersed inside of with that stack crushing up or crushing down depending on what is put up against it.


*

sceptimatic

  • Flat Earth Scientist
  • 30059
Re: Sea and air pressure
« Reply #620 on: September 25, 2020, 06:38:39 AM »


Of course I'm talking about steel pressure containers. Have you forgotten the sea-saw with the two natural gas containers already?

They don't visibly expand, they don't expand in any easily measurable way at all.

Yet these air stacks magically know to stop pressing down when gas from one passes to the other.
Start paying attention and  you'll realise I've never said they visibly expand.

You'll have a better chance of understanding if you actually pay attention and scrutinise.

*

JJA

  • 6869
  • Math is math!
Re: Sea and air pressure
« Reply #621 on: September 25, 2020, 07:35:17 AM »


Of course I'm talking about steel pressure containers. Have you forgotten the sea-saw with the two natural gas containers already?

They don't visibly expand, they don't expand in any easily measurable way at all.

Yet these air stacks magically know to stop pressing down when gas from one passes to the other.
Start paying attention and  you'll realise I've never said they visibly expand.

You'll have a better chance of understanding if you actually pay attention and scrutinise.

Yeah, I heard you the first time.  I also said they don't expand in any easily measurable way, which you ignored.

How do these air stacks know what's going on inside sealed containers?  You claim it's because they are expanding but we both know that expansion is so close to zero it might as well be.

*

sceptimatic

  • Flat Earth Scientist
  • 30059
Re: Sea and air pressure
« Reply #622 on: September 25, 2020, 07:53:42 AM »

Quote from: JJA
How do these air stacks know what's going on inside sealed containers?
They don't. The stack is the stack. What happens within it is what counts. DISPLACEMENT.
Sorry for shouting.

Quote from: JJA
  You claim it's because they are expanding but we both know that expansion is so close to zero it might as well be.
No, we both don't know this. You think it is this and I believe it to be massive relative to the dense mass.



You surely accept you need a hell of a lot of force to fill a hot water bottle with air, than a balloon...........right?

Can you also accept that in order for you to do this you are taking an enormous amount of atmosphere and channelling that into the water bottle as opposed to the balloon which you take much less?


You can also understand that the hot water bottle reacts to being filled with air. It expands, just like the balloon.
Why does it expand?
Because you transferred that amount of atmosphere into it which overcame the structural resistance to it but still holds strong, yet the structure still displaces a lot of atmosphere due to the thickness, whereas the balloon doesn't.


All you need to do is to go up the scale, all the way to your steel tank to understand what's happening.

Re: Sea and air pressure
« Reply #623 on: September 25, 2020, 08:40:18 AM »
So what pushed the balloon down?
The air above, as thin as it is, it is the addition to the dense mass of the balloon and gas against the thin resistant stack trying to stop that dense mass.

It's alway s a push on push.
A squeeze on the stack anything is immersed inside of with that stack crushing up or crushing down depending on what is put up against it.

But you just conceded that there is little to no air and little to no pressure in the tank!

*

JJA

  • 6869
  • Math is math!
Re: Sea and air pressure
« Reply #624 on: September 25, 2020, 08:41:05 AM »

Quote from: JJA
How do these air stacks know what's going on inside sealed containers?
They don't. The stack is the stack. What happens within it is what counts. DISPLACEMENT.
Sorry for shouting.

Quote from: JJA
  You claim it's because they are expanding but we both know that expansion is so close to zero it might as well be.
No, we both don't know this. You think it is this and I believe it to be massive relative to the dense mass.



You surely accept you need a hell of a lot of force to fill a hot water bottle with air, than a balloon...........right?

Can you also accept that in order for you to do this you are taking an enormous amount of atmosphere and channelling that into the water bottle as opposed to the balloon which you take much less?


You can also understand that the hot water bottle reacts to being filled with air. It expands, just like the balloon.
Why does it expand?
Because you transferred that amount of atmosphere into it which overcame the structural resistance to it but still holds strong, yet the structure still displaces a lot of atmosphere due to the thickness, whereas the balloon doesn't.


All you need to do is to go up the scale, all the way to your steel tank to understand what's happening.

None of that makes any sense.  Lets eliminate the whole expansion/contraction nonsense.

Take this sea-saw, and enclose it.



Now walk from one end to the other, and gravity will pull you down, making the sea-saw tilt to whatever side you are standing.

It's completely enclosed, there is no expansion or contraction because you are not changing the pressure anywhere, just walking back and forth.

In your theory, how do your atmosphere-stacks know where you are inside the box?

Re: Sea and air pressure
« Reply #625 on: September 25, 2020, 09:03:48 AM »


[/quote]


The below stack hits the "foundation" and starts comprsssing and stacking up.

Well in the see-saw gas tank scenario, the tank walls are impermeable to the gas.
The gas cant get out.
Air cant get in.
The if this rocket was placed on top of the gas tank, the sponges would stack into the tank - unaffecting the inside of the tank.
Anything inside would not feel and change in weight.

*

JackBlack

  • 21560
Re: Sea and air pressure
« Reply #626 on: September 25, 2020, 04:14:19 PM »
And of course, you ignore the simple issues directly relating to what you claimed you would stick to until "I understood".
Once more, does this mean I understand and your model is wrong?
If not, why not actually provide an explanation?

Explain how the introduced 1 kg weight affects the pressure gauge but not the scale, without 1 explanation contradicting the other and without contradicting the idea that pressure is what causes things to fall.

As a reminder, saying the newly introduced 1 kg weight is using the floor of the container for resistance applies to both the scale and the pressure gauge meaning neither should record an increase. That means that explanation doesn't hold.

As a reminder, saying that the increase in pressure acts on the scale from all directions (which needs to include upwards from below also applies to pressure in general, meaning the air pressure would normally apply a force upwards from below meaning the scale would not record any weight at all from the displacement of atmosphere.

Can you actually address this issue, or is your model wrong?

Every action must have an equal and opposite reaction somewhere. It has to.
You seem to reject that for rockets, but lets not get distracted.
As already pointed out, that is already there. You have the 2 tanks.
They have the action and reaction.

It absolutely does but you can't understand it from my side.
The issue isn't understanding, it is your model not working.

Water pressure only pushes things up if those things are less dense than the water they are in.
No, it pushes everything in it up.
This produces a clearly measurable change in weight.
It is just that for objects more dense than the water, gravity acting directly on the object still wins and pushes the object down so the net force (from gravity and buoyancy) is down.

This is just another contradiction of your model.
You say that it all just pushes down, until you need it to push up to match reality.

They get crushed up, not from below but from all around
How?
In order to be pushed up, it needs a force from below, or are you now saying the water magically pushes the object up from the side or the top?

Either way, you no longer have it just pushing down.
If there is this force pushing things up, why should the density of the object matter at all?
There is no reason for your magic air to crush most things down but then magically change and push some things up.

You do yourself no favours playing this game.
And more deflection from simple issues which show your model to be nonsense.

You do yourself no favours by repeatedly ignoring these issues.
All it does is show that you have no answer, that your model does not work.
Once more, in every case of watching air pressure working, we see it push from regions of high pressure to regions of low pressure to balance that pressure.
This is the basis of an internal combustion engine, where the fuel is ignited, causing it to expand and reach a high pressure, which then pushes the piston towards a region of lower pressure.
Pumps work by displacing air to create a pressure differential to have the air equalise. If air magically forced things from low to high pressure, there would be no need for a pump.
Pneumatic tools work on the high pressure air pushing the components towards lower pressure.
This then also matches how buoyancy works. This pressure gradient in the atmosphere or in the any fluid pushing the object from a higher pressure to a lower pressure.

Yet you claim the atmosphere magically works in defiance of these well established principles and instead magically pushes objects down from a region of low pressure to a region of high pressure, with the air below the object just chilling and not caring to apply a force, until it needs to do so to make your model work.

*

sceptimatic

  • Flat Earth Scientist
  • 30059
Re: Sea and air pressure
« Reply #627 on: September 25, 2020, 11:09:03 PM »
So what pushed the balloon down?
The air above, as thin as it is, it is the addition to the dense mass of the balloon and gas against the thin resistant stack trying to stop that dense mass.

It's alway s a push on push.
A squeeze on the stack anything is immersed inside of with that stack crushing up or crushing down depending on what is put up against it.

But you just conceded that there is little to no air and little to no pressure in the tank!
Explain?

*

sceptimatic

  • Flat Earth Scientist
  • 30059
Re: Sea and air pressure
« Reply #628 on: September 25, 2020, 11:15:40 PM »
  Lets eliminate the whole expansion/contraction nonsense.

Take this sea-saw, and enclose it.



Now walk from one end to the other, and gravity will pull you down, making the sea-saw tilt to whatever side you are standing.

It's completely enclosed, there is no expansion or contraction because you are not changing the pressure anywhere, just walking back and forth.

In your theory, how do your atmosphere-stacks know where you are inside the box?
Ok, you say enclose it.
Even enclosed you are in normal atmospheric conditions. You are in 14/15 psi of pressure and your body including the see saw and everything inside that enclosed area all displace the atmosphere within.

The very second you move, you change your atmospheric displacement to where you end up and the atmosphere fills the space you left behind. This is immediate.
The very second you move a finger...a foot.....and arm...or your entire body...you change the area of displacement.
If you are stood on a see saw you also change the foundation position.

Let's see how you deal with this to see where we go from here.

*

sceptimatic

  • Flat Earth Scientist
  • 30059
Re: Sea and air pressure
« Reply #629 on: September 25, 2020, 11:18:38 PM »




The below stack hits the "foundation" and starts comprsssing and stacking up.

Well in the see-saw gas tank scenario, the tank walls are impermeable to the gas.
The gas cant get out.
Air cant get in.
The if this rocket was placed on top of the gas tank, the sponges would stack into the tank - unaffecting the inside of the tank.
Anything inside would not feel and change in weight.
[/quote] A balloon holds gas inside and stops gas entering from outside.
What happens to it?

It expands and contracts depending on what's been trapped inside of it (expands) or what is let out of it (contracts).