ANOTHER EXPERIMENT: Gravity Doesn't Exist

  • 2289 Replies
  • 85963 Views
*

sceptimatic

  • Flat Earth Scientist
  • 28338
Re: ANOTHER EXPERIMENT: Gravity Doesn't Exist
« Reply #630 on: February 23, 2021, 09:08:56 AM »


Hmm, you haven't got the faintest clue how a magnet works, do you?
That all depends on whether you have a clue how a magnet works, Mr bully boy.

*

sceptimatic

  • Flat Earth Scientist
  • 28338
Re: ANOTHER EXPERIMENT: Gravity Doesn't Exist
« Reply #631 on: February 23, 2021, 09:12:25 AM »


Hmmm.  So there is a whirling crash of air around the magnets though? 

Itís hard to understand.  You are being VERY unclear. You always say you want basic and simple, can you do not do that yourself?
I'm trying to give you something easy.

And I can not think of a simpler system than a magnet sitting on a desk.

Basic, no need to bring anything else into it to complicate it, just a magnetic material, calmly sitting there, and the air around it. 

In your explanation, what is happening to the magnet and the air around it? Can you not explain such a simple system?

 
A trapped high v low pressure as it stands.


What do you mean?  There is a high pressure gas trapped inside the magnet?
Not fully trapped, no. On the move from high pressure to low pressure but funnel trapped to a squeeze back into the atmosphere.

Like a battery flowing from terminal back to terminal via something that is placed in the path.


Re: ANOTHER EXPERIMENT: Gravity Doesn't Exist
« Reply #632 on: February 23, 2021, 09:20:06 AM »


Hmmm.  So there is a whirling crash of air around the magnets though? 

Itís hard to understand.  You are being VERY unclear. You always say you want basic and simple, can you do not do that yourself?
I'm trying to give you something easy.

And I can not think of a simpler system than a magnet sitting on a desk.

Basic, no need to bring anything else into it to complicate it, just a magnetic material, calmly sitting there, and the air around it. 

In your explanation, what is happening to the magnet and the air around it? Can you not explain such a simple system?

 
A trapped high v low pressure as it stands.


What do you mean?  There is a high pressure gas trapped inside the magnet?
Not fully trapped, no. On the move from high pressure to low pressure but funnel trapped to a squeeze back into the atmosphere.


So where is the high pressure and where is the low pressure? 

Re: ANOTHER EXPERIMENT: Gravity Doesn't Exist
« Reply #633 on: February 23, 2021, 09:30:43 AM »


hmm, how does this generate a force between two magnets?
Put your lips over a bottle and evacuate a little bit of air so the air in the bottle becomes less pressurised.
Now your lips are stuck to the bottle top like a magnet...right?

Atmospheric imbalance.

super interesting thought there.
last year you told us it's not possible to suck air out of a box.
It's not. And you aren't sucking air out of a bottle, either. So what's your point?

really?
i'm pretty sure the lower pressure caused by my lungs is "sucking" (in the traditional definition of the word unless you want to provide am alternate redefinition).
this action is causing the bottled air to evacuate.
the air would not have left the bottle on its own otherwise.

the point is, your previously claimed that nothinginess can't exist because you cna't suck air out of a box.
you tried to use this to wave away how helium balloons sink or how feathers fall at the same rate as bowling balls when air is removed - which directly disproves your need for air to push things down - when there is no air!
« Last Edit: February 23, 2021, 09:44:17 AM by Themightykabool »

Re: ANOTHER EXPERIMENT: Gravity Doesn't Exist
« Reply #634 on: February 23, 2021, 10:57:23 AM »


Hmm, you haven't got the faintest clue how a magnet works, do you?
That all depends on whether you have a clue how a magnet works, Mr bully boy.

Most people do, Mr wimpy kid. If you don't like being ridiculed, perhaps don't be ridiculous?

Re: ANOTHER EXPERIMENT: Gravity Doesn't Exist
« Reply #635 on: February 23, 2021, 01:02:56 PM »
It affects all materials but most materials have properties that do not allow the funnelling effect to channel the vortex.
Your example shows that shouldn't be a problem. You don't need a special material to allow a vacuum cleaner to "suck" it up.
So again, why are only some materials affected?
The right make up of structure.
That is just a bunch of words which explain nothing.
Again, why are only some materials affected?

And again, explain the polarity, as your "explanation" simply does not work.
Again, if your "explanation" was correct, then one side of a magnet would repel everything and the other side would attract everything.
2 attractive sides would attract each other.

(And this is without getting into the more complex aspects of magnetism such as paramagnetic and the behaviour of superconductors, and electromagnetic induction, which further shows your explanation to be garbage)

This in no way matches what is observed for magnets, where only some materials are effected; for magnetic materials which are not magnets, any orientation of a magnet will attract it rather than one side attracting and one repelling; and when you have 2 magnets, the 2 "attractive" sides (which in reality is just one polarity rather than being an attractive side) would repel each other.

They are some of the key things you need to explain.

How do you make an electromagnet work?
Look at the process.
In a fundamentally different way to a fan, showing it has nothing to do with the air.
An electromagnetic works by movement of charged particles, which creates an electromagnetic field which can pull or push.
Normal magnets work based upon the exact same principles, just using the electrons in the material which are already in motion.
There is no air involved, and it even works in a vacuum.

We can also see what happens with 2 electromagnets, where they work just like normal magnets with poles. It is nothing like what you suggest with a magical vortex.
If it was, then putting the 2 attractive sides together would result the magnets attracting one another, and putting the 2 repulsive sides together would cause them to repel.
And you can easily see that by things which actually use the air, like vacuum cleaners, or to set up a pretend electromagnet, a fan in the middle of a tube with lots of air flowing through.

The attraction is greatest with the 2 inlet sides facing each other. It will have a negligible force with an inlet facing an outlet (depending on the strength of the 2 fans). And it has a repulsive force with the 2 outlets facing each other.

Conversely, with electromagnets, it has an attractive force when opposite poles are facing each other (i.e. N faces S), regardless of which way around they are, and a repulsive force when the same pole faces each other (i.e. N faces N or S faces S).

Again, this clearly shows IT IS NOT THE AIR!

Now going to address that, or will you just continue to ignore it or deflect like you do with everything that shows you are wrong.

A trapped high v low pressure as it stands.
 Like opening the plug when something is pushed at it.
Again, this fails to explain how a magnet works.
Maybe you can try drawing a diagram.

Hmm, you haven't got the faintest clue how a magnet works, do you?
That all depends on whether you have a clue how a magnet works
Why?
Why does someone else knowing how a magnet works have any bearing on if you know?
That would be more along the lines of your ability to con someone.
If someone has no idea how a magnet works, it can be relatively easily to con them with a plausible sounding explanation, however if they know how they work, they will see through your BS and likely be able to point out flaws. But that has no bearing on if you know how they work.

So is this your indirect admission that you have no idea how magnets work and are just trying to con us?

Re: ANOTHER EXPERIMENT: Gravity Doesn't Exist
« Reply #636 on: February 23, 2021, 01:03:33 PM »
It's about going down to the basics to gain a better insight.
That's what I'm trying to do.
No, it seems what you are trying to do is discard basically all of actual science, and pretend everything is the air and only ever pushing.
The problem is that when you get down to the basics you see that that idea of it all being the air is pure nonsense.

Just dig further if you feel the need.
At which point you just insult us and claim you have already explained it, or just deflect.
For example, just like you did when we kept digging for:
How air explains inertia,
How there is a pressure gradient in the atmosphere,
How the air pushes an object down, in direct defiance of that pressure gradient (and several key things related to your attempt at an explanation, like why an object placed against a wall isn't pushed into the wall by the atmosphere),
How displacing more air causes less weight not more,
How an object in a vacuum chamber (i.e. where their air pressure is reduced) weighs more, rather than less,
How an object immersed in a denser fluid which needs to displace that fluid also weighs less, rather than more as you would expect due to displacing a denser fluid,
How a chain link holds itself together without any pulling force,
Why some materials are magnetic and not others (and that is while still ignoring the finer details of the different possibilities regarding magnetism),
Why magnets have 2 poles, commonly labelled North and South, such that if you bring 2 magnets together with one's N side facing the other's S side, they attract, but 2 N sides facing each other repel and 2 S sides facing each other repel.

It seems the more we dig the more you insult us and dodge.

So again, for you it seems to just be about avoiding reality at all costs.


Ok, so now we've got to that you can see how a scale measure of these boxes will produce different results in terms of resistance to atmospheric pressure upon them by using a scale plate as the foundation/resistance to that push back of atmosphere against displacement of it by the box's own dense mass.
Likewise, we can use an airtight box, and see how pumping out the air causes it to weigh less, not more like your nonsense expects.
This shows that displacement of the atmosphere causes an upwards force, just like the basics would predict based upon the pressure gradient of the atmosphere.

The basics tell us that because the pressure is greater the lower down you are, the atmosphere will apply an upwards force, not a downwards force.
For some reason you keep ignoring these basics because they show you are wrong.

If we place the box on the ground we can sume the box is being crushed from all sides by the atmosphere, except the underside which is flat against the ground.
So if we place it against a wall, the atmosphere will push it into the wall.
If we place it against the ceiling, the atmosphere will push it into the ceiling.
And in mid air, the atmosphere will simply try to crush it.

In fact, when it is against the ceiling, "nothing can push the box down, except for the absolute minimal stray and tiny available pressures that can seep above it which is almost irrelevant.
What is relevant is the resistance of that box structure in using the ceiling as the structural resistance to the all round crush back of its own displacement of atmosphere, minus any atmospheric volume it already holds."

But back in reality, the object is always pushed/pulled down (ignoring effects in addition to weight).

If we were to place that same box in water then the water becomes a resistance to the atmospheric push back on the box's displacement of it, meaning the box now also displaces the water by pushing it out of the way and raising it to crush back to arrest that push, unless the atmospheric displacement by the box is such that the water cannot overcome the atmospheric push/crush down.
Why?
Why should the water push the object up while the air pushes it down?
If we place the box on the floor of a pool we can assume the box is being crushed from all sides by the water, except the underside which is flat against the floor.
Basically nothing can push the box up, except for the absolute minimal stray and tiny available pressures that can seep under it which is almost irrelevant.
What is relevant is the resistance of that box structure in using the floor as the structural resistance to the all round crush back of its own displacement of water, minus any water volume it already holds.

So not only does your explanation fail to match reality, you need to contradict yourself.

*

sceptimatic

  • Flat Earth Scientist
  • 28338
Re: ANOTHER EXPERIMENT: Gravity Doesn't Exist
« Reply #637 on: February 23, 2021, 10:55:29 PM »


Hmmm.  So there is a whirling crash of air around the magnets though? 

Itís hard to understand.  You are being VERY unclear. You always say you want basic and simple, can you do not do that yourself?
I'm trying to give you something easy.

And I can not think of a simpler system than a magnet sitting on a desk.

Basic, no need to bring anything else into it to complicate it, just a magnetic material, calmly sitting there, and the air around it. 

In your explanation, what is happening to the magnet and the air around it? Can you not explain such a simple system?

 
A trapped high v low pressure as it stands.


What do you mean?  There is a high pressure gas trapped inside the magnet?
Not fully trapped, no. On the move from high pressure to low pressure but funnel trapped to a squeeze back into the atmosphere.


So where is the high pressure and where is the low pressure?
Think of the front door opening and the back door closed
Now imagine how that pressure is not really felt until the back door or window, is opened.


*

sceptimatic

  • Flat Earth Scientist
  • 28338
Re: ANOTHER EXPERIMENT: Gravity Doesn't Exist
« Reply #638 on: February 23, 2021, 11:04:50 PM »


hmm, how does this generate a force between two magnets?
Put your lips over a bottle and evacuate a little bit of air so the air in the bottle becomes less pressurised.
Now your lips are stuck to the bottle top like a magnet...right?

Atmospheric imbalance.

super interesting thought there.
last year you told us it's not possible to suck air out of a box.
It's not. And you aren't sucking air out of a bottle, either. So what's your point?

really?
i'm pretty sure the lower pressure caused by my lungs is "sucking" (in the traditional definition of the word unless you want to provide am alternate redefinition).
Traditionally you know it as, sucking. There's no such thing as suck just as there is no such thing as ,pull...in terms of what they supposedly mean.
It's ok to use the words to explain stuff you physically see and believe but the reality is, they do not show a reality, in my honest opinion. It's all push/crush or basically resistance of matter against matter or molecules against molecules.


 
Quote from: Themightykabool
this action is causing the bottled air to evacuate.
the air would not have left the bottle on its own otherwise.
It does leave the bottle on its own, as long as a lower pressure is created at the bottle top to allow it to expand out.


 
Quote from: Themightykabool
the point is, your previously claimed that nothinginess can't exist because you cna't suck air out of a box.
No I didn't.
Don't argue this until you prove it.

 
Quote from: Themightykabool
you tried to use this to wave away how helium balloons sink or how feathers fall at the same rate as bowling balls when air is removed - which directly disproves your need for air to push things down - when there is no air!
You're getting desperate.
Be clearer in what you're saying and show me what I've said so I can answer it honestly.

*

sceptimatic

  • Flat Earth Scientist
  • 28338
Re: ANOTHER EXPERIMENT: Gravity Doesn't Exist
« Reply #639 on: February 23, 2021, 11:08:22 PM »


Hmm, you haven't got the faintest clue how a magnet works, do you?
That all depends on whether you have a clue how a magnet works, Mr bully boy.

Most people do, Mr wimpy kid. If you don't like being ridiculed, perhaps don't be ridiculous?
You aren't capable of ridiculing, Mr internet bully boy. You're just trying to be someone who can't be anyone on a flat Earth forum.
Anyway, aside from you being a little bully, how about you explain how magnets work and then why they work, little bully boy.

*

sceptimatic

  • Flat Earth Scientist
  • 28338
Re: ANOTHER EXPERIMENT: Gravity Doesn't Exist
« Reply #640 on: February 23, 2021, 11:12:43 PM »
It affects all materials but most materials have properties that do not allow the funnelling effect to channel the vortex.
Your example shows that shouldn't be a problem. You don't need a special material to allow a vacuum cleaner to "suck" it up.
So again, why are only some materials affected?
The right make up of structure.
That is just a bunch of words which explain nothing.
Again, why are only some materials affected?

And again, explain the polarity, as your "explanation" simply does not work.
Again, if your "explanation" was correct, then one side of a magnet would repel everything and the other side would attract everything.
2 attractive sides would attract each other.

(And this is without getting into the more complex aspects of magnetism such as paramagnetic and the behaviour of superconductors, and electromagnetic induction, which further shows your explanation to be garbage)

This in no way matches what is observed for magnets, where only some materials are effected; for magnetic materials which are not magnets, any orientation of a magnet will attract it rather than one side attracting and one repelling; and when you have 2 magnets, the 2 "attractive" sides (which in reality is just one polarity rather than being an attractive side) would repel each other.

They are some of the key things you need to explain.

How do you make an electromagnet work?
Look at the process.
In a fundamentally different way to a fan, showing it has nothing to do with the air.
An electromagnetic works by movement of charged particles, which creates an electromagnetic field which can pull or push.
Normal magnets work based upon the exact same principles, just using the electrons in the material which are already in motion.
There is no air involved, and it even works in a vacuum.

We can also see what happens with 2 electromagnets, where they work just like normal magnets with poles. It is nothing like what you suggest with a magical vortex.
If it was, then putting the 2 attractive sides together would result the magnets attracting one another, and putting the 2 repulsive sides together would cause them to repel.
And you can easily see that by things which actually use the air, like vacuum cleaners, or to set up a pretend electromagnet, a fan in the middle of a tube with lots of air flowing through.

The attraction is greatest with the 2 inlet sides facing each other. It will have a negligible force with an inlet facing an outlet (depending on the strength of the 2 fans). And it has a repulsive force with the 2 outlets facing each other.

Conversely, with electromagnets, it has an attractive force when opposite poles are facing each other (i.e. N faces S), regardless of which way around they are, and a repulsive force when the same pole faces each other (i.e. N faces N or S faces S).

Again, this clearly shows IT IS NOT THE AIR!

Now going to address that, or will you just continue to ignore it or deflect like you do with everything that shows you are wrong.

A trapped high v low pressure as it stands.
 Like opening the plug when something is pushed at it.
Again, this fails to explain how a magnet works.
Maybe you can try drawing a diagram.

Hmm, you haven't got the faintest clue how a magnet works, do you?
That all depends on whether you have a clue how a magnet works
Why?
Why does someone else knowing how a magnet works have any bearing on if you know?
That would be more along the lines of your ability to con someone.
If someone has no idea how a magnet works, it can be relatively easily to con them with a plausible sounding explanation, however if they know how they work, they will see through your BS and likely be able to point out flaws. But that has no bearing on if you know how they work.

So is this your indirect admission that you have no idea how magnets work and are just trying to con us?
When I give out stuff as factual, then you have a case.
I'm asked how magnets work. I'm trying to explain from my side.
What you take from that is down to you. What anyone takes from it, is down to them.

If people can engage their spidey senses they may take something from it and put pieces in my jigsaw.
If not, as in, people like you, then the discussion becomes bottle necked.

Re: ANOTHER EXPERIMENT: Gravity Doesn't Exist
« Reply #641 on: February 23, 2021, 11:43:43 PM »


Hmmm.  So there is a whirling crash of air around the magnets though? 

Itís hard to understand.  You are being VERY unclear. You always say you want basic and simple, can you do not do that yourself?
I'm trying to give you something easy.

And I can not think of a simpler system than a magnet sitting on a desk.

Basic, no need to bring anything else into it to complicate it, just a magnetic material, calmly sitting there, and the air around it. 

In your explanation, what is happening to the magnet and the air around it? Can you not explain such a simple system?

 
A trapped high v low pressure as it stands.


What do you mean?  There is a high pressure gas trapped inside the magnet?
Not fully trapped, no. On the move from high pressure to low pressure but funnel trapped to a squeeze back into the atmosphere.


So where is the high pressure and where is the low pressure?
Think of the front door opening and the back door closed
Now imagine how that pressure is not really felt until the back door or window, is opened.

So the magnet has doors and windows?  And it pressurizes itself inside?

Re: ANOTHER EXPERIMENT: Gravity Doesn't Exist
« Reply #642 on: February 24, 2021, 12:00:10 AM »

Traditionally you know it as, sucking. There's no such thing as suck just as there is no such thing as ,pull...in terms of what they supposedly mean.
It's ok to use the words to explain stuff you physically see and believe but the reality is, they do not show a reality, in my honest opinion. It's all push/crush or basically resistance of matter against matter or molecules against molecules.





 
Quote from: Themightykabool
you tried to use this to wave away how helium balloons sink or how feathers fall at the same rate as bowling balls when air is removed - which directly disproves your need for air to push things down - when there is no air!
You're getting desperate.
Be clearer in what you're saying and show me what I've said so I can answer it honestly.



 
Quote from: Themightykabool
the point is, your previously claimed that nothinginess can't exist because you cna't suck air out of a box.
No I didn't.
Don't argue this until you prove it.






i'll give you one - where sucking in terms of push pull - is correct.
The air pushes itself out of the bottle to expand outwards to max out it's "container".



helium balloons has been mentioned to you plenty of times
quit dodging you dodgy MF.




and throughout this thread you denied the feather bowling ball experiment as a dupe.
tehrer's way more to refresh your memory but i just grabbed a quick link

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=82434.msg2219883#msg2219883



no
i'm NOT talking about reactionary work.
i'm TALKING about the existence of vaccuums which you said don't exist.
They don't exist and I've told you exactly why.
Remember no free space?
Remember all molecules are attached?

No vacuums can exist and it shouldn't really be hard to understand why.
So that rules out your space rockets and the space you believed you knew.

Right
You told us.
And then you gave the analogy of people getting off a bus.
If they canget off the bus, the bus is then empty.
Your analogy.
That contradicts the sponge analogy.
« Last Edit: February 24, 2021, 12:06:44 AM by Themightykabool »

*

sceptimatic

  • Flat Earth Scientist
  • 28338
Re: ANOTHER EXPERIMENT: Gravity Doesn't Exist
« Reply #643 on: February 24, 2021, 12:25:06 AM »


So the magnet has doors and windows?  And it pressurizes itself inside?
I think this is where we part company.
Make another name and have another go.

*

sceptimatic

  • Flat Earth Scientist
  • 28338
Re: ANOTHER EXPERIMENT: Gravity Doesn't Exist
« Reply #644 on: February 24, 2021, 12:27:34 AM »

Traditionally you know it as, sucking. There's no such thing as suck just as there is no such thing as ,pull...in terms of what they supposedly mean.
It's ok to use the words to explain stuff you physically see and believe but the reality is, they do not show a reality, in my honest opinion. It's all push/crush or basically resistance of matter against matter or molecules against molecules.





 
Quote from: Themightykabool
you tried to use this to wave away how helium balloons sink or how feathers fall at the same rate as bowling balls when air is removed - which directly disproves your need for air to push things down - when there is no air!
You're getting desperate.
Be clearer in what you're saying and show me what I've said so I can answer it honestly.



 
Quote from: Themightykabool
the point is, your previously claimed that nothinginess can't exist because you cna't suck air out of a box.
No I didn't.
Don't argue this until you prove it.






i'll give you one - where sucking in terms of push pull - is correct.
The air pushes itself out of the bottle to expand outwards to max out it's "container".



helium balloons has been mentioned to you plenty of times
quit dodging you dodgy MF.




and throughout this thread you denied the feather bowling ball experiment as a dupe.
tehrer's way more to refresh your memory but i just grabbed a quick link

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=82434.msg2219883#msg2219883



no
i'm NOT talking about reactionary work.
i'm TALKING about the existence of vaccuums which you said don't exist.
They don't exist and I've told you exactly why.
Remember no free space?
Remember all molecules are attached?

No vacuums can exist and it shouldn't really be hard to understand why.
So that rules out your space rockets and the space you believed you knew.

Right
You told us.
And then you gave the analogy of people getting off a bus.
If they canget off the bus, the bus is then empty.
Your analogy.
That contradicts the sponge analogy.
What are you trying to show me?
You create your own issues.
Get your head right and come back and have a real conversation if you can.

Re: ANOTHER EXPERIMENT: Gravity Doesn't Exist
« Reply #645 on: February 24, 2021, 12:32:17 AM »


So the magnet has doors and windows?  And it pressurizes itself inside?
I think this is where we part company.
Make another name and have another go.

If you donít want to explain your idea of how magnets work, thatís okay with me. I was just interested if you could explain it clearly and simply, as this is something you request from others.

I have a magnet.  Sitting on a table.  What is going on with the air and the magnet that is different than the piece of non magnetic material nearby?

About as basic and simple a situation as there is to explain.  If you choose to keep your ideas about it obscured though, thatís your choice.

Re: ANOTHER EXPERIMENT: Gravity Doesn't Exist
« Reply #646 on: February 24, 2021, 12:33:57 AM »
It affects all materials but most materials have properties that do not allow the funnelling effect to channel the vortex.
Your example shows that shouldn't be a problem. You don't need a special material to allow a vacuum cleaner to "suck" it up.
So again, why are only some materials affected?
The right make up of structure.
That is just a bunch of words which explain nothing.
Again, why are only some materials affected?

And again, explain the polarity, as your "explanation" simply does not work.
Again, if your "explanation" was correct, then one side of a magnet would repel everything and the other side would attract everything.
2 attractive sides would attract each other.

(And this is without getting into the more complex aspects of magnetism such as paramagnetic and the behaviour of superconductors, and electromagnetic induction, which further shows your explanation to be garbage)

This in no way matches what is observed for magnets, where only some materials are effected; for magnetic materials which are not magnets, any orientation of a magnet will attract it rather than one side attracting and one repelling; and when you have 2 magnets, the 2 "attractive" sides (which in reality is just one polarity rather than being an attractive side) would repel each other.

They are some of the key things you need to explain.

How do you make an electromagnet work?
Look at the process.
In a fundamentally different way to a fan, showing it has nothing to do with the air.
An electromagnetic works by movement of charged particles, which creates an electromagnetic field which can pull or push.
Normal magnets work based upon the exact same principles, just using the electrons in the material which are already in motion.
There is no air involved, and it even works in a vacuum.

We can also see what happens with 2 electromagnets, where they work just like normal magnets with poles. It is nothing like what you suggest with a magical vortex.
If it was, then putting the 2 attractive sides together would result the magnets attracting one another, and putting the 2 repulsive sides together would cause them to repel.
And you can easily see that by things which actually use the air, like vacuum cleaners, or to set up a pretend electromagnet, a fan in the middle of a tube with lots of air flowing through.

The attraction is greatest with the 2 inlet sides facing each other. It will have a negligible force with an inlet facing an outlet (depending on the strength of the 2 fans). And it has a repulsive force with the 2 outlets facing each other.

Conversely, with electromagnets, it has an attractive force when opposite poles are facing each other (i.e. N faces S), regardless of which way around they are, and a repulsive force when the same pole faces each other (i.e. N faces N or S faces S).

Again, this clearly shows IT IS NOT THE AIR!

Now going to address that, or will you just continue to ignore it or deflect like you do with everything that shows you are wrong.

A trapped high v low pressure as it stands.
 Like opening the plug when something is pushed at it.
Again, this fails to explain how a magnet works.
Maybe you can try drawing a diagram.

Hmm, you haven't got the faintest clue how a magnet works, do you?
That all depends on whether you have a clue how a magnet works
Why?
Why does someone else knowing how a magnet works have any bearing on if you know?
That would be more along the lines of your ability to con someone.
If someone has no idea how a magnet works, it can be relatively easily to con them with a plausible sounding explanation, however if they know how they work, they will see through your BS and likely be able to point out flaws. But that has no bearing on if you know how they work.

So is this your indirect admission that you have no idea how magnets work and are just trying to con us?
When I give out stuff as factual, then you have a case.
No, I have a case unless you are giving it out as fiction.
i.e. if you are in any way indicating this may explain magnetism in reality, I have a case, as I am clearly showing how your explanation doesn't work.

So are you saying your claims is just delusional ramblings with no connection to reality, or are you claiming what you are providing with vortexes and so on could potentially explains magnetism in reality? (Note that latter doesn't mean you are claiming it is entirely factual, just that it has the potential to be so)

*

sceptimatic

  • Flat Earth Scientist
  • 28338
Re: ANOTHER EXPERIMENT: Gravity Doesn't Exist
« Reply #647 on: February 24, 2021, 01:17:28 AM »

No, I have a case unless you are giving it out as fiction.
i.e. if you are in any way indicating this may explain magnetism in reality, I have a case, as I am clearly showing how your explanation doesn't work.

So are you saying your claims is just delusional ramblings with no connection to reality, or are you claiming what you are providing with vortexes and so on could potentially explains magnetism in reality? (Note that latter doesn't mean you are claiming it is entirely factual, just that it has the potential to be so)
I have my own theory as to how magnets work.
Trying to explain them to you is pretty pointless, as anyone can see.
Sobchak was another one that thought it was clever in trying to reel me in to have a dig.
And you think I'm going to try and explain my side to you when all you come back with is the gunk you do?

Carry on wasting your own time.

Re: ANOTHER EXPERIMENT: Gravity Doesn't Exist
« Reply #648 on: February 24, 2021, 01:33:37 AM »
reaching another limit to sceppy's ability to explain?
just a bunch of dismissiveness.

Re: ANOTHER EXPERIMENT: Gravity Doesn't Exist
« Reply #649 on: February 24, 2021, 01:37:57 AM »

No, I have a case unless you are giving it out as fiction.
i.e. if you are in any way indicating this may explain magnetism in reality, I have a case, as I am clearly showing how your explanation doesn't work.

So are you saying your claims is just delusional ramblings with no connection to reality, or are you claiming what you are providing with vortexes and so on could potentially explains magnetism in reality? (Note that latter doesn't mean you are claiming it is entirely factual, just that it has the potential to be so)
I have my own theory as to how magnets work.


No, you simply CLAIM that you have theory.  You SAY that you have an explanation of how magnets work.

Yet you can not actually give this explanation. 

You are free to make whatever excuses you want, you can blame us if it makes you feel better, and then run off in a huff.  Thats fine, people do such things all the time.

What should the rational skeptic think though?  Someone claims to have a new theory, and then they can't explain it in any way that makes sense - should someone look at that idea with less or more curiosity than if the person can clearly communicate the concept?

Re: ANOTHER EXPERIMENT: Gravity Doesn't Exist
« Reply #650 on: February 24, 2021, 04:08:04 AM »
No, I have a case unless you are giving it out as fiction.
i.e. if you are in any way indicating this may explain magnetism in reality, I have a case, as I am clearly showing how your explanation doesn't work.
So are you saying your claims is just delusional ramblings with no connection to reality, or are you claiming what you are providing with vortexes and so on could potentially explains magnetism in reality? (Note that latter doesn't mean you are claiming it is entirely factual, just that it has the potential to be so)
I have my own theory as to how magnets work.
And notice how you are claiming that is a theory on how magnets work.
You aren't claiming it is just a fantasy with no connection to reality.
That means I have a case, as you "theory" does not work at all.

Trying to explain them to you is pretty pointless, as anyone can see.
Purely because your theory cannot explain even simple stuff regarding magnets, and I'm not just going to accept BS.
Dismissing what I am saying as "gunk" because you cannot honestly and rationally address it just shows how pathetic and broken your "theory" is.

If it was actually "gunk" then you would be able to refute it, like I refuted your "theory".

Now again, can you account for any of the aspects of magnetism I have highlighted which clearly demonstrate magnetism is not caused by the air?

Try starting with the basics, of how magnets have 2 poles, N and S. If you bring the N pole of one magnet to the S pole of the other, the magnets are attracted to one other.
But if you try to push the N pole of one to the N pole of the other, they 2 magnets repel each other, and likewise if you bring the S pole of one to the S pole of the other, the magnets also repel.

Because that is pretty much the basics of magnetism, and your air has no hope of explaining it.

You can make an attractive vortex with the air, you can make a repulsive one. But you can't set up something so like vortexes repel while opposites attract. The best you get is 2 repulsive vortexes repelling with 2 attractive vortexes attract. But that simply isn't how magnets work.

So going to address the issue yet? Or will you just come up with more excuses and dismissal and insults?

Re: ANOTHER EXPERIMENT: Gravity Doesn't Exist
« Reply #651 on: February 24, 2021, 05:45:46 AM »
reaching another limit to sceppy's ability to explain?

Apparently.  It is fine by me, every idea has its limit.  I was just hopeful his limit here was more than just saying a magnet on a table is kind of like a house with some open doors and windows that somehow traps pressure and generates a tornado of some sort.

He got awfully touchy about it though, didn't he? 

Re: ANOTHER EXPERIMENT: Gravity Doesn't Exist
« Reply #652 on: February 24, 2021, 06:10:01 AM »

No, I have a case unless you are giving it out as fiction.
i.e. if you are in any way indicating this may explain magnetism in reality, I have a case, as I am clearly showing how your explanation doesn't work.

So are you saying your claims is just delusional ramblings with no connection to reality, or are you claiming what you are providing with vortexes and so on could potentially explains magnetism in reality? (Note that latter doesn't mean you are claiming it is entirely factual, just that it has the potential to be so)
I have my own theory as to how magnets work.
Trying to explain them to you is pretty pointless, as anyone can see.
Sobchak was another one that thought it was clever in trying to reel me in to have a dig.
And you think I'm going to try and explain my side to you when all you come back with is the gunk you do?

Carry on wasting your own time.

Sceptimatic, do yourself a favor, buy some magnets and actually DO some practical experiments on magnetism. If you'd like a hand in one what kind of experiments to do, for what purpose, let me know.

Oh, and I'm on night work, so I apologise if I seem like a schizophrenic right now.

*

sceptimatic

  • Flat Earth Scientist
  • 28338
Re: ANOTHER EXPERIMENT: Gravity Doesn't Exist
« Reply #653 on: February 24, 2021, 07:47:28 AM »

No, I have a case unless you are giving it out as fiction.
i.e. if you are in any way indicating this may explain magnetism in reality, I have a case, as I am clearly showing how your explanation doesn't work.

So are you saying your claims is just delusional ramblings with no connection to reality, or are you claiming what you are providing with vortexes and so on could potentially explains magnetism in reality? (Note that latter doesn't mean you are claiming it is entirely factual, just that it has the potential to be so)
I have my own theory as to how magnets work.
Trying to explain them to you is pretty pointless, as anyone can see.
Sobchak was another one that thought it was clever in trying to reel me in to have a dig.
And you think I'm going to try and explain my side to you when all you come back with is the gunk you do?

Carry on wasting your own time.

Sceptimatic, do yourself a favor, buy some magnets and actually DO some practical experiments on magnetism. If you'd like a hand in one what kind of experiments to do, for what purpose, let me know.

Oh, and I'm on night work, so I apologise if I seem like a schizophrenic right now.
No need to apologise, you're unimportant to me to be anything. Don't feel the need to play Jeckyll and Hyde and then apologise.

As for magnets. Do you know how they work and why?

Re: ANOTHER EXPERIMENT: Gravity Doesn't Exist
« Reply #654 on: February 24, 2021, 08:42:18 AM »
Can someone summarize why we are talking about magnets?

Re: ANOTHER EXPERIMENT: Gravity Doesn't Exist
« Reply #655 on: February 24, 2021, 09:06:10 AM »
Can someone summarize why we are talking about magnets?

Sorry, probably my fault.  Think it stemmed from his claim that all forces can be explained through atmospheric "pushing".  I was interested in how he imagined this would work for magnets, and tried (unsuccessfully) to get an explanation.  Have apparently derailed the thread even further in the process. 

Re: ANOTHER EXPERIMENT: Gravity Doesn't Exist
« Reply #656 on: February 24, 2021, 09:39:52 AM »

No, I have a case unless you are giving it out as fiction.
i.e. if you are in any way indicating this may explain magnetism in reality, I have a case, as I am clearly showing how your explanation doesn't work.

So are you saying your claims is just delusional ramblings with no connection to reality, or are you claiming what you are providing with vortexes and so on could potentially explains magnetism in reality? (Note that latter doesn't mean you are claiming it is entirely factual, just that it has the potential to be so)
I have my own theory as to how magnets work.
Trying to explain them to you is pretty pointless, as anyone can see.
Sobchak was another one that thought it was clever in trying to reel me in to have a dig.
And you think I'm going to try and explain my side to you when all you come back with is the gunk you do?

Carry on wasting your own time.

Sceptimatic, do yourself a favor, buy some magnets and actually DO some practical experiments on magnetism. If you'd like a hand in one what kind of experiments to do, for what purpose, let me know.

Oh, and I'm on night work, so I apologise if I seem like a schizophrenic right now.
No need to apologise, you're unimportant to me to be anything. Don't feel the need to play Jeckyll and Hyde and then apologise.

As for magnets. Do you know how they work and why?

I will apologize if I think I've hurt your tender feelings and you're crying like a newborn baby. To answer your question, yes. Yes, I do know how magnets work and why.  I'm doing a physics course at the moment, and magnetism is a chapter I completed long ago.

Unless you can demonstrate you are willing to conduct your own experiments with magnets, instead of theorising in fantasy land as per usual, my dialogue with you on this topic is over. It is not related to gravity.

*

sceptimatic

  • Flat Earth Scientist
  • 28338
Re: ANOTHER EXPERIMENT: Gravity Doesn't Exist
« Reply #657 on: February 24, 2021, 10:51:20 AM »

 To answer your question, yes. Yes, I do know how magnets work and why.  I'm doing a physics course at the moment, and magnetism is a chapter I completed long ago.


Ok then you can tell me how and why they work, unless you just want to just say you do, because.

Re: ANOTHER EXPERIMENT: Gravity Doesn't Exist
« Reply #658 on: February 24, 2021, 12:23:44 PM »
You are the teacher around here aren't you?  So really it should be you explaining to us how magnetics work. Whatever we think is likely to be wrong from your point of view so perhaps you could enlighten us before we make fools of ourselves.

I will hazard a guess that you believe it has something to do with pressure.  Your explanations usually involve pressure somewhere.
« Last Edit: February 24, 2021, 12:25:27 PM by Solarwind »

Re: ANOTHER EXPERIMENT: Gravity Doesn't Exist
« Reply #659 on: February 24, 2021, 12:39:27 PM »

 To answer your question, yes. Yes, I do know how magnets work and why.  I'm doing a physics course at the moment, and magnetism is a chapter I completed long ago.


Ok then you can tell me how and why they work, unless you just want to just say you do, because.

They work because - all matter contains electric charges. Two similar charges repel each other, whereas two different charges will attract each other. Two electrons will repel. Two protons will repel. But an electron and a proton will attract.

Magnetic fields are measured by a unit called a Tesla and a smaller measurement is called a gauss. Ten thousand gauss is equal to one tesla.

Earth's magnetic field is caused by the rotation of the earth causing deep internal currents of electrically charged particles in the liquid outer core.

Earth's magnetic field at the surface is measured at half a gauss.

Just a few facts for you to disprove, sceptimatic, with your own superior theory.