ANOTHER EXPERIMENT: Gravity Doesn't Exist

  • 1905 Replies
  • 40051 Views
*

sceptimatic

  • Flat Earth Scientist
  • 27388
Re: ANOTHER EXPERIMENT: Gravity Doesn't Exist
« Reply #960 on: March 09, 2021, 07:56:36 AM »
As far as I'm concerned gravity is a pull.   I am standing on the Earth because the centre of gravity (centre of the Earth) is pulling me towards it.  However the surface of the Earth itself is pushing back against that with equal magnitude.  So there is no resultant force and so I go nowhere.

Gravity, in our experience up to now is only ever an attractive force though.
Ok, so you get pulled down but you're also pushed up in equal measure.
Is this what you're saying?

Re: ANOTHER EXPERIMENT: Gravity Doesn't Exist
« Reply #961 on: March 09, 2021, 08:03:41 AM »
Yep.  That is Newtons 3rd law is not?   For every action force there is an equal but opposite reaction force. 

If two forces of equal magnitude but opposite direction (force is a vector quantity) then the resultant force (net force) will be zero because they cancel each other out.

Re: ANOTHER EXPERIMENT: Gravity Doesn't Exist
« Reply #962 on: March 09, 2021, 08:10:06 AM »


Okay, lets get back to your concept of magnetism then!

I read carefully everything you said,  and I am wondering if my understanding of your concept correct -

There is atmosphere consisting of molecules around the magnet.  Degraded bits of these atmospheric molecules (like hydrogen), get pushed through the structure of the magnet.  They go in one side and are pushed out the other side (from high to low back to high pressure), then circle back along the sides of the magnet in order to go back into the magnet in a loop. 

Is this right?  If not, can you clarify to make it so?
Sort of, yes.

Only sort of?  What is wrong and what is right?  Can you say simply and clearly so I dont only have a partial understanding?

*

sceptimatic

  • Flat Earth Scientist
  • 27388
Re: ANOTHER EXPERIMENT: Gravity Doesn't Exist
« Reply #963 on: March 09, 2021, 08:28:28 AM »
Yep.  That is Newtons 3rd law is not?   For every action force there is an equal but opposite reaction force. 

If two forces of equal magnitude but opposite direction (force is a vector quantity) then the resultant force (net force) will be zero because they cancel each other out.
Ok. Now let's bring your moon into the equation.

what is it? One sixth gravity of Earth's as we're told.

Ok, so let's see how the moon pulls up the sea.
Any idea?

I'd also like to know how the inner Earth pulls everything towards the centre.

*

sceptimatic

  • Flat Earth Scientist
  • 27388
Re: ANOTHER EXPERIMENT: Gravity Doesn't Exist
« Reply #964 on: March 09, 2021, 08:30:13 AM »


Okay, lets get back to your concept of magnetism then!

I read carefully everything you said,  and I am wondering if my understanding of your concept correct -

There is atmosphere consisting of molecules around the magnet.  Degraded bits of these atmospheric molecules (like hydrogen), get pushed through the structure of the magnet.  They go in one side and are pushed out the other side (from high to low back to high pressure), then circle back along the sides of the magnet in order to go back into the magnet in a loop. 

Is this right?  If not, can you clarify to make it so?
Sort of, yes.

Only sort of?  What is wrong and what is right?  Can you say simply and clearly so I dont only have a partial understanding?
I said you're sort of on the right path.
Just go along with that.

*

Stash

  • 7310
Re: ANOTHER EXPERIMENT: Gravity Doesn't Exist
« Reply #965 on: March 09, 2021, 08:41:42 AM »
Do humans have the ability to create a chamber that is extreme enough to make it so pressure becomes so low that it cannot create much pressure agitation? In other words, can we simulate an "extreme" low pressure according to your definition?
The strength of the chamber is one thing. The ability to push against the external atmosphere with a pump to allow natural decompression of matter inside the chamber is also massively key.

We can simulate a very low pressure but not what you see inside a simple bell jar. That's not even close.
You need something that can create the pressures that are closer to the dome ceiling.
Super fluids/gases.

Is it incorrect to say that in your theory, the lower the atmospheric pressure, the weaker the magnet?

*

JJA

  • 4202
  • Math is math!
Re: ANOTHER EXPERIMENT: Gravity Doesn't Exist
« Reply #966 on: March 09, 2021, 08:51:14 AM »
You are telling people who have worked with vacuums that they don't exist.

It's not the craziest thing you have claimed, but it's certainly up there.  If you can't understand it, it's not real, is that it?
They don't exist.
If you want to re-engage then deal with low pressure and tell me how it works from your side.
Can you do that?

Explain it from start to finish and let's see what you have.
I'll question you on it.

By all means do your usual of " oh here we go, he wants us to do all the work" carry on...and if so, just take a back seat with me.

What do you expect when you make wild claims, then demand people explain concepts you should be able to figure out for yourself?  And if anyone tries, you completely ignore it, fail to understand anything about it, and dismiss it all as lies.

So yes, do your own homework.  Learn how things are supposed to function, then show us where you think it's wrong.  Learn the theory.

But you don't do that, you just claim nothing works, nothing is real, all conspiracies and lies.


Re: ANOTHER EXPERIMENT: Gravity Doesn't Exist
« Reply #967 on: March 09, 2021, 09:03:36 AM »


Okay, lets get back to your concept of magnetism then!

I read carefully everything you said,  and I am wondering if my understanding of your concept correct -

There is atmosphere consisting of molecules around the magnet.  Degraded bits of these atmospheric molecules (like hydrogen), get pushed through the structure of the magnet.  They go in one side and are pushed out the other side (from high to low back to high pressure), then circle back along the sides of the magnet in order to go back into the magnet in a loop. 

Is this right?  If not, can you clarify to make it so?
Sort of, yes.

Only sort of?  What is wrong and what is right?  Can you say simply and clearly so I dont only have a partial understanding?
I said you're sort of on the right path.
Just go along with that.

Okay.  So there is a flow of broken down atmospheric molecules through the solid metal magnet, in one side and out the other and looping back around.  What does this do to give my little magnet its interesting properties?

Re: ANOTHER EXPERIMENT: Gravity Doesn't Exist
« Reply #968 on: March 09, 2021, 09:33:37 AM »
Quote
Ok. Now let's bring your moon into the equation.

what is it? One sixth gravity of Earth's as we're told.

Yep that's we are told. Obviously that's wrong isn't it because as we (..sorry you) know the Moon is actually a holographic projection/reflection.

Quote
I'd also like to know how the inner Earth pulls everything towards the centre.

So what are you going to do then to find out the answer to that question?  Why is the sky blue? Why does the Sun look yellow?  Why are some stars brighter than others and some show different colours? Why does toast always land butter side down?  Life is full of questions isn't it!  How do we find out the answers to those questions?  Well we could look them up if we accept everything we are told or read.  Or we could make them up if we prefer to question everything we are told or read. What other choice do we have?  How do we get to know anything?

« Last Edit: March 09, 2021, 12:50:14 PM by Solarwind »

Re: ANOTHER EXPERIMENT: Gravity Doesn't Exist
« Reply #969 on: March 09, 2021, 01:00:09 PM »
If I can't explain it enough for people like you to understand then I have to try and find a way to do that....but equally you people need to try your best to understand the set up from my side by understanding my overall theory of Earth which leads up to this.
I have, the problem is that it is full of so many internal contradictions and has no chance of matching reality. But I still let you try to show that that is wrong by explaining these problems.

Simple logic shows that magnets, if they worked like you claim, would function fundamentally differently to how they are observed.
This should be enough to show your "explanation" for how magnets work cannot be correct as it predicts fundamentally different results.
At the very least, it shows there is a fundamental problem with your model of how magnets work.

I am doing my best to understand how magnets work using air, but I find what you say impossible to reconcile with the observed behaviour of magnets.
Simple logic tells me that with a flow of air you have one section flowing outwards, pushing anything there away, and another section flowing inwards, pushing anything towards the magnet.

Even ignoring the the different magnetic properties of materials, this is irreconcilable with the observed interactions of 2 magnets.
The above should result in 2 of these outward flows repelling each other as they push each other away and 2 of the inwards flows attracting each other as the air pushes them towards each other so they "attract" one another.
The more complex way would be if you have an outwards flow and an inward flow. For this I think it would depend upon which flow is stronger, with a weaker overall interaction than the above arrangement.
If the outwards flow is stronger, it should push the other magnet away. If the inwards flow is stronger it should "attract" the other magnet.

This means if you have 2 magnets, with one stronger than the other, when you have them set up to have the 2 inwards flows pointing towards each other, they "attract".
If you turn both magnets around 180 degrees, then the 2 outwards flows are pointing towards each other, they repel.

From either of those set ups, if you turn the weaker magnet, then it would be the same as if you didn't, but with a weaker interaction.
Note that this means if you have it set up with them attracting, and turn both magnets around, it will still repel.

So overall, if you turn both magnets around, you switch between repulsion and attraction.
If you turn a single magnet around, it depends on if you turn around the strong or weak magnet.
Turning around the weak magnet will either weaken or intensify the interaction, turning around the strong magnet switches it like turning around both.

Doing my best to understand, using what you have said and simple logic, that is what your model indicates should happen.
And you are yet to point out any part of that understanding which is wrong.
If you think part of this understanding is wrong, please point out what part you think is wrong and why you think it is wrong, explaining simply how it should work.

The problem comes when you compare this prediction with reality.
In reality, there does not appear to be an attractive and repulsive pole. Instead there appears to be 2 poles, where opposite poles attract and like poles repel.
If you take 2 magnets and put different poles towards each other, they attract. If you turn both around 180 degrees, they still attract. If you turn either magnet around (but not both), then they repel. From this repelling arrangement, if you turn both around, they still repel.

Jane is one person that grasped a fair bit because she allowed herself to take out a fair chunk of other bias.
The main distinction between me and Jane is that Jane didn't point out all the problems.
She knew it didn't have any chance of matching reality due to all the problems with it, including how it contradicts reality and itself. But she just wanted to know everything your model had, rather than wanting a model to match reality.

People like you spend far too much time jumping on one thing and then calling it dishonest and pathetic and all the rest of whatever comes out of your typing minds.
No, I notice a key part of your model not matching reality.
I call your continual avoidance of that issue dishonest and pathetic and all the rest. For your model, it simply means it is wrong.

There are plenty of examples of this. The polarity of magnets is just the most recent.
Any time there is a problem with your model where it fails to match reality you do whatever you can to dodge this issue, even when it shows your model must be fundamentally wrong.
One tactic you use is to try to switch between different topics.
Yet you then tell me and others to just stick to one.

Understand the strength of atmospheric pressure and you understand the displacement of it and that return pressure back upon each dense mass.
Understand the pressure gradient and you understand that the atmosphere pushes things up, not down, as well as trying to crush it inwards, not down.
Break that down into one thing at a time and I'll deal with it.
No, you wont.
When it is one thing at a time you deflect from the issue, play dumb, insult me by claiming I'm twisting what you say, or if it isn't up to the problem yet, you just go along until it shows a massive problem and then do one of the other options.

This post shows an understanding of your claim about magnets and why it cannot match reality.

Read it and tell me what part you think is wrong.
If you like, start at the top, and just go through one part at a time.
Because I have no interest in your useless back and forth of trying to get you to accept 1 point at a time, where you do whatever you can to avoid any part that shows you are wrong.

So go read, start from the top, and tell me when you find something that you think is wrong, and explain why it is wrong.

If you can't, stop pretending you can explain anything with your garbage models.
« Last Edit: March 09, 2021, 01:15:06 PM by JackBlack »

Re: ANOTHER EXPERIMENT: Gravity Doesn't Exist
« Reply #970 on: March 09, 2021, 01:01:33 PM »
The issue is in people piecing a little bit of the jigsaw from my side and to hold that piece in position to then add to it.
What I see is, people do that then discard it and go off on a tangent, then come right back to the first piece again.
That is actually what you do so often it isn't funny.
You provide one piece to try to explain one thing, but then throw it away and make a new piece to try to describe another thing, even though they directly contradict each other.
You hate it when people like me then keep the first piece and show how it contradicts the second piece or that the second piece simply doesn't fit in with it.

The above is a quite simple example of that.

I keep the pieces of your jigsaw, assemble it and show that it doesn't match reality.
But because that so clearly shows that your claims don't match reality, you object and refuse to deal with it.

You want us to only ever focus on a single piece at a time, that way you can pretend that single piece is perfect with no fault and ignore all the problems that it causes. And you do this with basically everything.

I await a person who is willing to actually go past the silver platter explanations of mainstream ideal, handed out by so called officials/authority...and go into alternate mode. That's the best way of understanding.
You mean you await a person who is willing to just accept whatever BS you spout without thinking at all. That is not a way of understanding at all.
That is a way of indoctrinating people.

I've come across many like you who make out you are trying to grasp stuff and then join the little play ground crowd of bullies who then go into nah nah frenzy.
Have you considered that perhaps you and your claims are the problem?
That these people make a genuine attempt to grasp stuff, realise it doesn't match reality and try to bring up these problems, only for you to repeatedly ignore these faults and insult people who bring them up?
Have you considered that perhaps you are the bully who goes into a "nah nah frenzy" with your irrational hatred of the globe and repeatedly calling it nonsense even though you can find no fault with it at all?

If you're genuine then ask the right questions and stick to it before you move on. Do it for you, not for anyone else.
The problem is that with you, the "right questions" only include those you think you can answer without showing you are wrong.
If it is a legitimate question which someone who is actually trying to understand your model would ask, but it shows your model is wrong, you reject it.

Re: ANOTHER EXPERIMENT: Gravity Doesn't Exist
« Reply #971 on: March 09, 2021, 01:03:54 PM »
It was the same response to wehn he was given a clear video of a 3d simulation and he dismisses it away by requesting a specific time point for discusssion.
He had no relevant point to dismiss the video and instead chose to deflect by asking us to describe a point on the video.


Re: ANOTHER EXPERIMENT: Gravity Doesn't Exist
« Reply #972 on: March 09, 2021, 01:14:10 PM »
Yep.  That is Newtons 3rd law is not?   For every action force there is an equal but opposite reaction force. 

If two forces of equal magnitude but opposite direction (force is a vector quantity) then the resultant force (net force) will be zero because they cancel each other out.
I wouldn't say that part is Newton's third law.
Newton's third law says that the Earth is being pulled towards you with the same force.

It is then a separate interaction between you and the surface of Earth, where you are pushing down into Earth and Earth is pushing you up.

The equal and opposite reaction apply on different objects, one on you and one on Earth.

Only sort of?  What is wrong and what is right?  Can you say simply and clearly so I dont only have a partial understanding?
No, he can't. Because if he did then you would have him pinned down with clear claims about how his model works, which you can then use to show that his model doesn't actually work, because predictions from the model don't match reality.

He needs to keep it vague, so anytime his model fails to match reality, he can pretend that it is all your fault for not understanding it, rather than his fault and the fault of his model for not matching reality.

*

sceptimatic

  • Flat Earth Scientist
  • 27388
Re: ANOTHER EXPERIMENT: Gravity Doesn't Exist
« Reply #973 on: March 09, 2021, 10:28:14 PM »
Do humans have the ability to create a chamber that is extreme enough to make it so pressure becomes so low that it cannot create much pressure agitation? In other words, can we simulate an "extreme" low pressure according to your definition?
The strength of the chamber is one thing. The ability to push against the external atmosphere with a pump to allow natural decompression of matter inside the chamber is also massively key.

We can simulate a very low pressure but not what you see inside a simple bell jar. That's not even close.
You need something that can create the pressures that are closer to the dome ceiling.
Super fluids/gases.

Is it incorrect to say that in your theory, the lower the atmospheric pressure, the weaker the magnet?
No.

*

sceptimatic

  • Flat Earth Scientist
  • 27388
Re: ANOTHER EXPERIMENT: Gravity Doesn't Exist
« Reply #974 on: March 09, 2021, 10:31:36 PM »


Okay, lets get back to your concept of magnetism then!

I read carefully everything you said,  and I am wondering if my understanding of your concept correct -

There is atmosphere consisting of molecules around the magnet.  Degraded bits of these atmospheric molecules (like hydrogen), get pushed through the structure of the magnet.  They go in one side and are pushed out the other side (from high to low back to high pressure), then circle back along the sides of the magnet in order to go back into the magnet in a loop. 

Is this right?  If not, can you clarify to make it so?
Sort of, yes.

Only sort of?  What is wrong and what is right?  Can you say simply and clearly so I dont only have a partial understanding?
I said you're sort of on the right path.
Just go along with that.

Okay.  So there is a flow of broken down atmospheric molecules through the solid metal magnet, in one side and out the other and looping back around.  What does this do to give my little magnet its interesting properties?
It creates pressure differences through friction/vibration.

*

sceptimatic

  • Flat Earth Scientist
  • 27388
Re: ANOTHER EXPERIMENT: Gravity Doesn't Exist
« Reply #975 on: March 09, 2021, 10:32:36 PM »
Quote
Ok. Now let's bring your moon into the equation.

what is it? One sixth gravity of Earth's as we're told.

Yep that's we are told. Obviously that's wrong isn't it because as we (..sorry you) know the Moon is actually a holographic projection/reflection.

Quote
I'd also like to know how the inner Earth pulls everything towards the centre.

So what are you going to do then to find out the answer to that question?  Why is the sky blue? Why does the Sun look yellow?  Why are some stars brighter than others and some show different colours? Why does toast always land butter side down?  Life is full of questions isn't it!  How do we find out the answers to those questions?  Well we could look them up if we accept everything we are told or read.  Or we could make them up if we prefer to question everything we are told or read. What other choice do we have?  How do we get to know anything?
At least you admit you cannot answer it.

Re: ANOTHER EXPERIMENT: Gravity Doesn't Exist
« Reply #976 on: March 10, 2021, 12:16:53 AM »
There you go ignoring reality yet again.

Once more, CAN YOU EXPLAIN THE OBSERVED POLARITY OF MAGNETS?
All logical thought shows that what you claim about magnets should produce fundamentally different results to what is observed in reality.
Your continued refusal to engage with this issue shows you likely know you are spouting pure garbage.
Why do you continue to pretend you have any idea at all of how magnets work when you continually refuse to address this fundamental issue with your model?


Do humans have the ability to create a chamber that is extreme enough to make it so pressure becomes so low that it cannot create much pressure agitation? In other words, can we simulate an "extreme" low pressure according to your definition?
The strength of the chamber is one thing. The ability to push against the external atmosphere with a pump to allow natural decompression of matter inside the chamber is also massively key.

We can simulate a very low pressure but not what you see inside a simple bell jar. That's not even close.
You need something that can create the pressures that are closer to the dome ceiling.
Super fluids/gases.

Is it incorrect to say that in your theory, the lower the atmospheric pressure, the weaker the magnet?
No.
Why?
How does the magnet keep the same strength with a lower pressure if it is using the air around it?

*

sceptimatic

  • Flat Earth Scientist
  • 27388
Re: ANOTHER EXPERIMENT: Gravity Doesn't Exist
« Reply #977 on: March 10, 2021, 12:26:58 AM »

Why?
How does the magnet keep the same strength with a lower pressure if it is using the air around it?
It doesn't.

Re: ANOTHER EXPERIMENT: Gravity Doesn't Exist
« Reply #978 on: March 10, 2021, 12:50:05 AM »
Quote
At least you admit you cannot answer it.

Did I admit that I cannot answer those questions?  If someone asked you why the sky is blue what would you tell them?

Quote
It doesn't.

Why not?  Have you personally tested that to verify it?  If so how?  What property of air pressure causes magnetism?  If air pressures and magnetism are related then why are only certain materials magnetic?  If I get a magnet and also two screws, one made of iron the other of brass why does the magnet only attract the iron screw and not the brass one?  Both are subject to the same air pressure around them.

This simple experiment provides evidence that the effect of magnetism is related to different materials. Specifically ferrous materials. It provides no evidence that it is related to air pressure.

If you take a magnet and then rub another magnet against it, the magnetic property is strengthened.  If you bash it against another, non-magnetic material the magnetic effect is weakened.  The air pressure in the room never changes.  This again provides evidence that the magnetic properties of the magnet are related to the material it is made of and nothing to do with air pressure or indeed any property of the air itself.
« Last Edit: March 10, 2021, 01:25:45 AM by Solarwind »

Re: ANOTHER EXPERIMENT: Gravity Doesn't Exist
« Reply #979 on: March 10, 2021, 01:43:01 AM »
And yet again avoid the issue of polarity which shows your model is garbage.
Why do you need to continually hide from this issue?
Is it because you know it kills your garbage?

Do humans have the ability to create a chamber that is extreme enough to make it so pressure becomes so low that it cannot create much pressure agitation? In other words, can we simulate an "extreme" low pressure according to your definition?
The strength of the chamber is one thing. The ability to push against the external atmosphere with a pump to allow natural decompression of matter inside the chamber is also massively key.

We can simulate a very low pressure but not what you see inside a simple bell jar. That's not even close.
You need something that can create the pressures that are closer to the dome ceiling.
Super fluids/gases.

Is it incorrect to say that in your theory, the lower the atmospheric pressure, the weaker the magnet?
No.
Why?
How does the magnet keep the same strength with a lower pressure if it is using the air around it?
It doesn't.
Good job contradicting yourself yet again.

You now claim it doesn't keep the same strength, but lowering the atmospheric pressure doesn't make it weaker.
You can't get much more contradictory than that.

Re: ANOTHER EXPERIMENT: Gravity Doesn't Exist
« Reply #980 on: March 10, 2021, 02:27:44 AM »
Perhaps Sceptimatic thinks that air pressure must have something to do with what we recognise as a magnetic effect because there is no physical contact necessary between two magnets for them to attract or repel each other.   The only thing that apparently links them is the air between them.

But that just means that magnetic fields can exist in air.  We cannot see a magnetic field any more than we can see an electrical field.  But not being able to see something doesn't mean it doesn't exist.  If we turn around one of the magnets the magnetic attraction becomes a magnetic repulsion because are altering the position of the magnetic poles. Dissimilar poles attract, similar poles repel.  It's the same for electrical fields because there are two types (-ve and +ve) of charge. There is nothing changing in the air itself so that would have no bearing on the magnetic force itself.  A magnet doesn't care whether it is surrounded by air or not.

The magnetic flux lines will be closer together nearer the magnet and further spaced further away.  So distance between the magnets will affect the strength of the magnetic effect.  We call it the magnetic flux intensity.
« Last Edit: March 10, 2021, 02:29:52 AM by Solarwind »

*

sceptimatic

  • Flat Earth Scientist
  • 27388
Re: ANOTHER EXPERIMENT: Gravity Doesn't Exist
« Reply #981 on: March 10, 2021, 02:31:06 AM »
Did I admit that I cannot answer those questions?


Yep.

*

sceptimatic

  • Flat Earth Scientist
  • 27388
Re: ANOTHER EXPERIMENT: Gravity Doesn't Exist
« Reply #982 on: March 10, 2021, 02:32:14 AM »
And yet again avoid the issue of polarity which shows your model is garbage.

Do you even know what polarity is?

*

sceptimatic

  • Flat Earth Scientist
  • 27388
Re: ANOTHER EXPERIMENT: Gravity Doesn't Exist
« Reply #983 on: March 10, 2021, 02:55:10 AM »
Perhaps Sceptimatic thinks that air pressure must have something to do with what we recognise as a magnetic effect because there is no physical contact necessary between two magnets for them to attract or repel each other.   The only thing that apparently links them is the air between them.

Pay more attention instead of getting into a frenzy.
Get your head around ATMOSPHERIC PRESSURE rather than the air pressure you go with.

Re: ANOTHER EXPERIMENT: Gravity Doesn't Exist
« Reply #984 on: March 10, 2021, 03:04:55 AM »
Get your head around atmosphere - what i means and what its made up of.

*

sceptimatic

  • Flat Earth Scientist
  • 27388
Re: ANOTHER EXPERIMENT: Gravity Doesn't Exist
« Reply #985 on: March 10, 2021, 03:06:33 AM »
Get your head around atmosphere - what i means and what its made up of.
Maybe you should start again.

*

sokarul

  • 18476
  • Discount Chemist
Re: ANOTHER EXPERIMENT: Gravity Doesn't Exist
« Reply #986 on: March 10, 2021, 03:07:19 AM »
While you wait for a response why not explain how an atom, which is measured in the nanometer range, can expand to be meters in size.
It can't.

Glad you gave up on that stupid idea. Imagine atoms having to expand to fill in all gaps. Just stupid.
ANNIHILATOR OF  SHIFTER

It's no slur if it's fact.

Re: ANOTHER EXPERIMENT: Gravity Doesn't Exist
« Reply #987 on: March 10, 2021, 03:11:00 AM »
ATMO

SPHERE


The spherical shell comprised of gases that surrounds a planet.


Re: ANOTHER EXPERIMENT: Gravity Doesn't Exist
« Reply #988 on: March 10, 2021, 03:27:53 AM »
Quote
Get your head around ATMOSPHERIC PRESSURE rather than the air pressure you go with.
I am not getting into a 'frenzy'.  I am simply trying to explain basic physics to you. 

The atmosphere is made of air is it not?  So atmospheric pressure is air pressure is it not?

That is true no matter how much you want to play around with HTML tags.  See I can do it as well :)

Quote
Imagine atoms having to expand to fill in all gaps. Just stupid
A gas expands to fill the available volume.  You don't find a small corner of your living room with no air in it do you?!? As a (fixed mass of) gas expands to fill the available volume it becomes less dense.  What does that tell you about the gaps between the atoms?  Also what happens to the kinetic energy of the gas molecules as it expands?

Quote
Maybe you should start again.
Atmosphere = air = gas. So air pressure = atmospheric pressure.  Not hard to grasp is it?

Quote
The spherical shell comprised of gases that surrounds a planet.
Correct.  Mars is only about a quarter the mass of Earth (as we are told) so no surprises that it has a lot less atmosphere than Earth. The PULL of Martian GRAVITY is less than that of Earth so the martian atmosphere has effectively floated off into space over time.  Only the heavier molecules are left which is why the martian atmospheric is mostly made up of carbon dioxide.  CO2 = 12 + 16 +16 = Molecular mass 44 by my reckoning. 1x C12 and 2x O16.

The Moon is a lot less massive than Earth and so all of its atmosphere has also floated off into space.  Again as Sceptimatic would say 'so we are told'.  And why have we been told that? 
« Last Edit: March 10, 2021, 03:43:51 AM by Solarwind »

Re: ANOTHER EXPERIMENT: Gravity Doesn't Exist
« Reply #989 on: March 10, 2021, 04:04:58 AM »
Maybe define atmospherec pressure vs air pressure

You appear to be using different words again