Experiment ideas to prove Denpressure?

The lightbulbs work because they are filled with what's known as inert gas which means it's very hard to break down and cause problems with the filament.
There's never any vacuum.

While modern ones will sometimes have inert gas, most have a vacuum, even those with the inert gas still have that as a vacuum.

Once more, it doesn't need to be perfect to be a vacuum.
That is just your dishonest BS to pretend space isn't real.

Again, care to explain the pressure gradient of the atmosphere, or how it manages to overcome this to push objects down?

Quote from: sceptimatic on June 11, 2023, 09:04:33 PM

The lightbulbs work because they are filled with what's known as inert gas which means it's very hard to break down and cause problems with the filament.
There's never any vacuum.

While modern ones will sometimes have inert gas, most have a vacuum, even those with the inert gas still have that as a vacuum.

Once more, it doesn't need to be perfect to be a vacuum.
That is just your dishonest BS to pretend space isn't real.

Again, care to explain the pressure gradient of the atmosphere, or how it manages to overcome this to push objects down?

It's lower pressure, not a vacuum no matter how many times you say it.
Obviously by all means use it to argue with as the books tell you but don't expect me to accept it.

If you want to use low pressure and put your vacuum in brackets then I'll be fine with that as I can deal with the low pressure.
Keep saying vacuum as an argument as if it's nothing then you will get the same response.

Quote from: JackBlack on June 12, 2023, 01:21:57 AM

Quote from: sceptimatic on June 11, 2023, 09:04:33 PM

The lightbulbs work because they are filled with what's known as inert gas which means it's very hard to break down and cause problems with the filament.
There's never any vacuum.

While modern ones will sometimes have inert gas, most have a vacuum, even those with the inert gas still have that as a vacuum.

Once more, it doesn't need to be perfect to be a vacuum.
That is just your dishonest BS to pretend space isn't real.

Again, care to explain the pressure gradient of the atmosphere, or how it manages to overcome this to push objects down?

It's lower pressure, not a vacuum no matter how many times you say it.
Obviously by all means use it to argue with as the books tell you but don't expect me to accept it.

If you want to use low pressure and put your vacuum in brackets then I'll be fine with that as I can deal with the low pressure.
Keep saying vacuum as an argument as if it's nothing then you will get the same response.

Sigh.

And again because we are beings that live and operate process surrounded normally around one atmosphere of pressure.  Where most read gauge pressures are relative to the pressure it’s surrounded in. 


 If I tell a coworker a tank has pressure.  They know if they jack with the tank it will eject or spray its contents out. 

If I tell a coworker a tank is vented   They know the stored energy is gone, and it’s equalized with atmosphere.  It’s safe to start maintenance.

If a tell a coworker a tank is at vacuum, they know it will draw in atmosphere if the pressure boundaries are broken.  This can cause a hazard to personal.  If the tank is jacked with.  It can draw in air that may lead to process contamination, ruin system efficiency, lead to dangerous reactions with air, damage equipment. 

Telling a coworker a tank has pressure, is vented, or at a vacuum communicates clear operating and safety context and meaning.

In fact.  Also. If a certain process needs to run at a certain vacuum in say inches mercury.  Not perfect vacuum.  And I tell a coworker the vacuum is being lost.  They know the process is in danger of being upset, could lead to product contamination. My lead to downtime, more work in maintenance and flushing the system of contaminants, and loss of profits.  They know to go check for leaks, seals, and the equipment that draws and maintains the system vacuum.

And again because we are beings that live and operate process surrounded normally around one atmosphere of pressure.  Where most read gauge pressures are relative to the pressure it’s surrounded in.

I have no issue with gauges and pressures in how I believe they work.
 

 If I tell a coworker a tank has pressure.  They know if they jack with the tank it will eject or spray its contents out. 

Yes it's called higher than the external pressure.

If I tell a coworker a tank is vented   They know the stored energy is gone, and it’s equalized with atmosphere.  It’s safe to start maintenance.

Yes it's simply part of the atmosphere as an open vent. No issues there. It's still pressure inside and out.

If a tell a coworker a tank is at vacuum, they know it will draw in atmosphere if the pressure boundaries are broken.

Yes in your area you can say anything you want to cover tasks but the argument still stands and that is, you're dealing with lower or higher pressure, not a vacuum.
As for drawing atmosphere, it's the opposite of what you're saying. Unless you want to explain what you mean by drawing atmosphere.

  This can cause a hazard to personal.  If the tank is jacked with.  It can draw in air that may lead to process contamination, ruin system efficiency, lead to dangerous reactions with air, damage equipment.

Well you're talking about seals and stuff so explain drawing in atmosphere.
None of what you;re saying is any argument against denpressure so I have no clue why you're using it.
 

Telling a coworker a tank has pressure, is vented, or at a vacuum communicates clear operating and safety context and meaning.

And you're telling someone of certain pressures. Higher or lower or as part of internal and external pressure marrying.
No vacuums.

In fact.  Also. If a certain process needs to run at a certain vacuum in say inches mercury.  Not perfect vacuum.

Not a perfect vacuum means not a vacuum at all.
It's running at a very low pressure.

 And I tell a coworker the vacuum is being lost.

How can you lose something that does not exist?
You can gain higher pressure but you cannot lose a vacuum.

  They know the process is in danger of being upset, could lead to product contamination. My lead to downtime, more work in maintenance and flushing the system of contaminants, and loss of profits.  They know to go check for leaks, seals, and the equipment that draws and maintains the system vacuum.

Higher and lower pressures is all you're dealing with. No vacuums.

Yes it's called higher than the external pressure.

It’s quicker and clearly communicates to a coworker if a tank is pressurized its a spraying / ejection hazard.  If it’s vented, it’s safe for maintenance.  If the tank is at vacuum, it will draw in atmosphere.  And  maybe impossible to lift off a cover or many.

Tanks at “low pressure” are still a projection / spray hazard if the pressure is still above atmosphere.

Less confusing to say a tank is pressurized as in having stored energy greater than atmosphere, or saying a tank is at vacuum to indicate it’s a draw in hazard with lower energy than atmosphere. 

More confusing to say all tanks are pressurized in the context of safety and radio communication because it doesn’t communicate the state and direction of stored energy. 

Don’t care if you like it or not.  But “pressurized” and “vacuum” also convey the state of stored energy a system is in.


In my field.  Pressurized means more stored energy than atmosphere.  Vented means no potential energy in regards to atmosphere. Vacuum means less stored energy than atmosphere.

A pressurized tank will flow / spray out if open to atmosphere.

Vented, potential / stored energy equalized with atmosphere in the context it’s safe to open panels and manways. Open a 24” manway on a tank at one pound of pressure is dangerous.  It could eject outward.


A tank at vacuum, especially from its contents cooling, has less energy than atmosphere.  The flow will be from atmosphere inward.  Maybe impossible to lift off covers or panels without hurting someone or damaging equipment.

And..

Because there is space between gas molecules like the ones found in atmosphere, which makes gas highly compressible.  Vs liquid like water that is essentially not compressible.

A tank of at 100 psig of air is more dangerous and has more stored energy than a tank completely filled with water at 100 psig.


A tank comply filled with water at 100 psi cracks open, pressure is almost instantly equalized with atmospheric pressure.

A tank with air at 100 psi ruptures when it fails, can be a missile hazard, and takes several seconds to equalize with atmospheric pressure.


It’s safer to hydro with water than use air for hydrostatic testing. 

Vs a tank at vacuum.  Where the tank has less potential energy than atmosphere so if developed an integrity issue.  Atmosphere will push inward to the tank.


Because I work in a plant surrounded by atmosphere. 
A pressured tank in the context described is a very different hazard  and amount of stored energy / potential vs a tank at vacuum.  And describes the direction of the hazard.

Is this the nature of den pressure delusion. Completely ignore the reference is one atmosphere.  Then make something muddled because one individual doesn’t understand how to communicate in industry / science and convention that communicates the nature of stored energy and hazards? 

It's lower pressure, not a vacuum no matter how many times you say it.

It is lower pressure, i.e. a vacuum. No mater how many times you want to lie and claim vacuums need to be perfect.

As I have said many times, if you don't want to speak English, then stop pretending to.

If you want a word to mean perfect vacuum, make your own.
As vacuum will continue to mean a pressure lower than ambient.

Now again, care to stop lying about the meaning of words and instead try to explain how the air magically stacks and defies the pressure gradient to push things down?

A low pressure tank doesnt suck.

Its the higher pressure that is pushed.

Hes semantically correct.

Not entirely accurate.   Suction cups for instance.

Quote from: Themightykabool on June 11, 2023, 06:51:14 AM

A low pressure tank doesnt suck.

Its the higher pressure that is pushed.

Hes semantically correct.

Not entirely accurate.   Suction cups for instance.

Suctions are pushed down on by the atmosphere.

Always a push.
Never a pull.
Interms of pressure.

And..

Because there is space between gas molecules like the ones found in atmosphere, which makes gas highly compressible.  Vs liquid like water that is essentially not compressible.

Everything is compressible.

Is this the nature of den pressure delusion. Completely ignore the reference is one atmosphere.  Then make something muddled because one individual doesn’t understand how to communicate in industry / science and convention that communicates the nature of stored energy and hazards?

You're the one muddling it all.
You're offering all kinds of stuff and you don't even know why.

Quote from: sceptimatic on June 12, 2023, 07:34:36 AM

It's lower pressure, not a vacuum no matter how many times you say it.

It is lower pressure, i.e. a vacuum. No mater how many times you want to lie and claim vacuums need to be perfect.

No matter how many times you try to use a vacuum I will offer an answer to it as an impossibility.
I don't claim vacuums need to be perfect because to have a perfect vacuum would mean nothing exists.

Low pressure or lower pressure or even extremely low pressure is fine by me because it still offers pressure and it still offers all, molecules being attached with absolutely no free space.
And it's as simple as that.

Quote from: DataOverFlow2022 on June 12, 2023, 11:42:03 AM

Is this the nature of den pressure delusion. Completely ignore the reference is one atmosphere.  Then make something muddled because one individual doesn’t understand how to communicate in industry / science and convention that communicates the nature of stored energy and hazards?

You're the one muddling it all.
You're offering all kinds of stuff and you don't even know why.

By using real world examples?



Then answer what is asked of you..

No gravity, just a element stack of dense to less dense molecules/matter/particles all pushing against each other from top to bottom and bottom to top. Action and reaction in equal measures.

Vs 2023…

It's impossible for something low pressure to overcome higher pressure, meaning a tank with low pressure will not suck/pull/drag anything in. It's a fallacy.

What’s the opposite and equal reaction for high pressure flowing to low pressure in your tank example in the context of den pressure delusion? 

Note.  Added.
Make it more challenging.  Especially when connected air tanks flow from high pressure to low pressure to equalize pressure to a uniform pressure throughout the tanks and system? 

Example.  What is the opposite and equal reaction if I connect a tank of breathing air at 3000 psi and another tank of breathing air at 1500 psi in parallel.  The I open the valves at the tanks so the pressure equalizes between the two tanks to a new uniform pressure between the two tanks. A pressure uniform throughout the system and dimensions of the tank. 

Quote from: NotSoSkeptical on June 13, 2023, 07:20:10 AM

Quote from: Themightykabool on June 11, 2023, 06:51:14 AM

A low pressure tank doesnt suck.

Its the higher pressure that is pushed.

Hes semantically correct.

Not entirely accurate.   Suction cups for instance.

Suctions are pushed down on by the atmosphere.

Always a push.
Never a pull.
Interms of pressure.

I don't prescribe to the lunancy that is denspressure.

Quote from: DataOverFlow2022 on June 12, 2023, 11:37:35 AM

And..

Because there is space between gas molecules like the ones found in atmosphere, which makes gas highly compressible.  Vs liquid like water that is essentially not compressible.

Everything is compressible.

To what degree.

Why does the energy added to hydraulic fluid working on a hydraulic cylinder go to moving the hydraulic cylinder and the load with great efficiency, not get consumed compressing the hydraulic fluid. 


Note added…

Forgot the important part that pressure is transmitted through the hydraulic fluid undiminished.

Definition for context.

Pascal's principle is defined as

A change in pressure at any point in an enclosed fluid at rest is transmitted undiminished to all points in the fluid.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pascal's_law

What’s the opposite and equal reaction for high pressure flowing to low pressure in your tank example in the context of den pressure delusion? 
Note.  Added.
Make it more challenging.  Especially when connected air tanks flow from high pressure to low pressure to equalize pressure to a uniform pressure throughout the tanks and system? 

Example.  What is the opposite and equal reaction if I connect a tank of breathing air at 3000 psi and another tank of breathing air at 1500 psi in parallel.  The I open the valves at the tanks so the pressure equalizes between the two tanks to a new uniform pressure between the two tanks. A pressure uniform throughout the system and dimensions of the tank.

You've just offered it.
I have no clue why you're using this.


Just remember for every action there is an equal and opposite reaction to that action.

Quote from: sceptimatic on June 13, 2023, 08:00:22 AM

Quote from: DataOverFlow2022 on June 12, 2023, 11:37:35 AM

And..

Because there is space between gas molecules like the ones found in atmosphere, which makes gas highly compressible.  Vs liquid like water that is essentially not compressible.

Everything is compressible.

To what degree.

It doesn't matter as to what degree it only matters that everything is compressible.
The energy required to compress some things is off our scale for power and only the Earth itself has that compressible force.
But the crux of the matter is, everything can be compressed.

Why does the energy added to hydraulic fluid working on a hydraulic cylinder go to moving the hydraulic cylinder and the load with great efficiency, not get consumed compressing the hydraulic fluid. 

You could move the hydraulic cylinder using most liquids and even gases but as you know some are much more compressible than others and are less efficient for hydraulics.

Even hydraulic fluid is compressible.

Note added…

Forgot the important part that pressure is transmitted through the hydraulic fluid undiminished.

Definition for context.

Quote

Pascal's principle is defined as

A change in pressure at any point in an enclosed fluid at rest is transmitted undiminished to all points in the fluid.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pascal's_law

Everything is transmitted but never undiminished.

Quote from: Themightykabool on June 13, 2023, 07:40:24 AM

Quote from: NotSoSkeptical on June 13, 2023, 07:20:10 AM

Quote from: Themightykabool on June 11, 2023, 06:51:14 AM

A low pressure tank doesnt suck.

Its the higher pressure that is pushed.

Hes semantically correct.

Not entirely accurate.   Suction cups for instance.

Suctions are pushed down on by the atmosphere.

Always a push.
Never a pull.
Interms of pressure.

I don't prescribe to the lunancy that is denspressure.

well it doesn't matter how wrong sceppy is.
that's how air and water work.

Quote from: NotSoSkeptical on June 13, 2023, 08:13:50 AM

Quote from: Themightykabool on June 13, 2023, 07:40:24 AM

Quote from: NotSoSkeptical on June 13, 2023, 07:20:10 AM

Quote from: Themightykabool on June 11, 2023, 06:51:14 AM

A low pressure tank doesnt suck.

Its the higher pressure that is pushed.

Hes semantically correct.

Not entirely accurate.   Suction cups for instance.

Suctions are pushed down on by the atmosphere.

Always a push.
Never a pull.
Interms of pressure.

I don't prescribe to the lunancy that is denspressure.

well it doesn't matter how wrong sceppy is.
that's how air and water work.

So your saying that the "vacuum" that a suction cup makes isn't pulling the cup to the surface but the atmosphere is pushing it?

Correct.

Not entirely accurate.   Suction cups for instance.

From a technical POV, vacuum doesn't suck, ever. You can have surface tension draw things up, but for pressure, it is always pressure pushing.

Suction cups work by a combined effect of intermolecular forces creating an air tight seal, and the air pressure outside the cup pushing it into whatever it is attached to.

So your saying that the "vacuum" that a suction cup makes isn't pulling the cup to the surface but the atmosphere is pushing it?

Given that is how it works, probably.
You can even demonstrate this with suction cups in a vacuum chamber.


As the air pressure outside the cups drops, the force pressing them to the wall drops, so they fall.

No matter how many times you try to use a vacuum I will offer an answer to it as an impossibility.

Which is just you wilfully rejecting reality.

I don't claim vacuums need to be perfect because to have a perfect vacuum would mean nothing exists.

If they don't need to be perfect that means an extremely low pressure system is a vacuum.
Can such a system exist?
This is not a system devoid of everything, but a system where the air pressure is very very low (well below ambient).
If vacuums don't need to be perfect, then that would be a vacuum. And if that can exist, that means vacuums can.

Low pressure or lower pressure or even extremely low pressure is fine by me because it still offers pressure and it still offers all, molecules being attached with absolutely no free space.
And it's as simple as that.

No, it isn't as simple as that, as you are still clinging to your delusion of magically attached molecules.
Gases have the properties they do because of the free space.
There is such a dramatic change from liquid to gas because of the free space.
You are yet to offer any viable alternative.
As such, you idea of no free space can be dismissed as the nonsense it is.

It doesn't matter as to what degree it only matters that everything is compressible.

It does matter.
As it highlights the free space, and destroys your nonsense.
Your nonsense provides no reason for any minimum size, or maximum compressibility.
Your nonsense provides no reason for why air is so much more compressible than water.

So that is the crux. Free space explains it.

Quote from: sceptimatic on June 13, 2023, 08:06:04 AM

No matter how many times you try to use a vacuum I will offer an answer to it as an impossibility.

Which is just you wilfully rejecting reality.

No. It's you rejecting any other explanation than the one you bought into, which, in my honest opinion, is not reality.

Quote from: sceptimatic on June 13, 2023, 08:06:04 AM

I don't claim vacuums need to be perfect because to have a perfect vacuum would mean nothing exists.

If they don't need to be perfect that means an extremely low pressure system is a vacuum.

No, it means an extremely low-pressure system is what it says. It's lower pressure.

Can such a system exist?

Not a vacuum, no.

This is not a system devoid of everything, but a system where the air pressure is very very low (well below ambient).

Then it's low pressure, not a vacuum.

If vacuums don't need to be perfect, then that would be a vacuum. And if that can exist, that means vacuums can.

Vacuums cannot be perfect because vacuums cannot exist.
You could argue that evacuation of matter will never end up leaving free space, meaning a vacuum cannot and never will exist.
For it to exist nothing else could which takes away the whole point of mentioning it as anything.

Quote from: sceptimatic on June 13, 2023, 08:06:04 AM

Low pressure or lower pressure or even extremely low pressure is fine by me because it still offers pressure and it still offers all, molecules being attached with absolutely no free space.
And it's as simple as that.

No, it isn't as simple as that, as you are still clinging to your delusion of magically attached molecules.

It's not about magic it's about natural compressive force between all molecules of varying layering and breakdown, with no free space.

The fight is simple enough to imagine.
Molecules vibrating under varying degrees of frequencies based on their molecular layering of continual expansion and compression.
You cannot have compression without expansion and you cannot have expansion without decompression.

It requires all molecules to be attached with no free space.

Gases have the properties they do because of the free space.

No. Gases have the properties they do because they're allowed to expand against other gases and liquids and such, to then be compressed into the Atmospherically stacked layering they eventually take up based on their own molecular breakdown of their own molecular layering. (Think gobstopper analogy).

There is such a dramatic change from liquid to gas because of the free space.

There is such a dramatic change because of molecular breakdown, not free space.

You are yet to offer any viable alternative.

I have done it many times and still offer variations of explanations to make it easier to grasp but people like yourself are never going to even try to understand it because you class anything against your indoctrinated beliefs as more of an insult and I'm fine with that so I'm under no illusions about you wanting to grasp anything or admitting you do.
What it does do is offer some people the chance to sit in the background and take some notice, which I know some are and that's what counts.

As such, you idea of no free space can be dismissed as the nonsense it is.

You can dismiss anything I say as often as you feel the need to and it changes nothing from my side.

Quote from: sceptimatic on June 13, 2023, 09:08:05 AM

It doesn't matter as to what degree it only matters that everything is compressible.

It does matter.
As it highlights the free space, and destroys your nonsense.

There can never be free space and anyone who cares to think deeply about it will know it's an impossibility unless you class seeing into an empty room as free space. If so then no wonder you struggle.

Your nonsense provides no reason for any minimum size, or maximum compressibility.

We are human and we are primitive in terms of senses and even tools to go far.
We can delve so deep but maybe only scratch the surface of life, so taking that into consideration there is no maximum or minimum to our mind.

Your nonsense provides no reason for why air is so much more compressible than water.

Molecular breakdown. Layering peeling from the molecule. (Gobstopper analogy)
Think carefully about it.

So that is the crux. Free space explains it.

The crux is simple. Free space does not exist so it comes down to decompressive forces causing compression in so many variations of density of molecular breakdown and the frequencies of them.

This is life from cell to within and the bacteria within the bacteria. And so on.

Hey Scepti, please stop with the word-fuckery. Here's one of the dictionary definitions of vacuum:

2
a
: a space absolutely devoid of matter
b
: a space partially exhausted (as to the highest degree possible) by artificial means (such as an air pump)
c
: a degree of rarefaction below atmospheric pressure

https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/vacuum
The second definition is the one being used by almost everyone here. I know you like redefining words for Denpressure, but redefining the word for an effect you say doesn't exist either way just seems petty.

No, Then it's low pressure, not a vacuum.

Again.  We are beings that live in one atmosphere, and you are ignoring the stored energy/ potential context.

Pressurized, greater than atmospheric pressure.  His more stored energy than air at atmosphere. A pressurized tank will spray out if containment is lost.  It will loss potential energy, and molecules to atmosphere.


Vacuum.  Pressure and stored energy below atmospheric pressure.  If a tank at vacuum loss containment, it will draw in atmosphere.  It will try to equalize with atmosphere by gaining more molecules, by gaining potential energy from atmosphere.

The word vacuum perfectly gives clear communication of pressure and potential energy in regards of atmosphere for the processes I work with. 

You could argue that evacuation of matter will never end up leaving free space, meaning a vacuum cannot and never will exist.

Again..

The word vacuum perfectly gives clear communication of pressure and potential energy in regards of atmosphere for the processes I work with. 


No free space?


That is what makes gases highly compressible.

Free space. That is why evacuating a chamber of air molecules below the amount of molecules found at atmosphere will make a feather fall faster.  As more molecules are evacuated, the faster the feather will fall.  Enough vacuum created by evacuating enough air molecules, before perfect vacuum, air resistance becomes negligible so a feather, coin, and bowling ball will fall at the same rate.


Now.

There has to be free space between molecules.  It explains how the air molecules get out of the way for objects to fall.  In den pressure delusion where molecules ensure there is no free space by expanding to consume all free space, there is no room for a feather to fall.  That literally means in den pressure delusion the mass / matter of air molecules have to expand so their mass takes up all free space.  That literally means the mass of the feather and the mass of air molecules have to occupy the same space at the same instance for the feather to fall through the expanded mass of air molecules in a vacuum in DPD ensuing all space is occupied by mater.

Quote from: DataOverFlow2022 on June 13, 2023, 08:13:10 AM

What’s the opposite and equal reaction for high pressure flowing to low pressure in your tank example in the context of den pressure delusion? 
Note.  Added.
Make it more challenging.  Especially when connected air tanks flow from high pressure to low pressure to equalize pressure to a uniform pressure throughout the tanks and system? 

Example.  What is the opposite and equal reaction if I connect a tank of breathing air at 3000 psi and another tank of breathing air at 1500 psi in parallel.  The I open the valves at the tanks so the pressure equalizes between the two tanks to a new uniform pressure between the two tanks. A pressure uniform throughout the system and dimensions of the tank.

You've just offered it.
I have no clue why you're using this.


Just remember for every action there is an equal and opposite reaction to that action.

Sigh…


You dodged the question.  And the question was for you to answer in the context of den pressure delusion..

They always remain stacked but the stacks are always being agitated against from above and below in terms of natural stacking and also all around the stacks in terms of rippling effects, as explained above..

Nothing is ever equal but everything tries to equalise, yet never really manages it.
For every action there is an equal and opposite, reaction.
It means a reaction must instantaneously follow the action, at all times to ensure you only get out of something what is put into it.
Applied force equals exact reactionary force.

So.  Again..


Example.  What is the opposite and equal reaction if I connect a tank of breathing air at 3000 psi and another tank of breathing air at 1500 psi in parallel.  I open the valves at the tanks so the pressure equalizes between the two tanks to a new uniform pressure between the two tanks. A pressure uniform throughout the system and dimensions of the tank.


Both tanks are at the same pressure potential.

The pressure in each tank is uniform with no stacking.

Everything is transmitted but never undiminished.

In a system where each molecule has a fixed size. 


Not in den pressure delusion.  Changes in pressure and energy go to making molecules expand and contract.

Being our daily reference is life in one atmosphere.  Where most processes and reactions take place we deal with. You might think of the below statement by you and why space with less molecules, potential energy, and pressure than one atmosphere is called “vacuum” vs saying “its pressurized”.

Nothing is ever equal but everything tries to equalise, yet never really manages it.
For every action there is an equal and opposite, reaction.
It means a reaction must instantaneously follow the action, at all times to ensure you only get out of something what is put into it.
Applied force equals exact reactionary force.

Quote from: JackBlack on June 13, 2023, 02:32:58 PM

Quote from: sceptimatic on June 13, 2023, 08:06:04 AM

No matter how many times you try to use a vacuum I will offer an answer to it as an impossibility.

Which is just you wilfully rejecting reality.

No. It's you rejecting any other explanation than the one you bought into, which, in my honest opinion, is not reality.

This isn't a matter of explanation, this is a matter of what words mean.
You are blatantly lying about what words mean for the sole purpose of pretending space can't exist.

Quote from: JackBlack

Quote from: sceptimatic on June 13, 2023, 08:06:04 AM

I don't claim vacuums need to be perfect because to have a perfect vacuum would mean nothing exists.

If they don't need to be perfect that means an extremely low pressure system is a vacuum.

No, it means an extremely low-pressure system is what it says. It's lower pressure.

So just outright contradicting yourself?

Again, it is quite simple, either you lie to everyone and claim that vacuums must be perfect vacuums in order to be a vacuum, that is they need to be devoid of all matter to be a vacuum.
Or you be honest for once and admit that vacuums do NOT need to be perfect, that they can have matter present, as long as it is significantly below ambient pressure.

So pick one.
Are you going to lie and claim vacuums need to be perfect, or are you going to admit they don't need to be perfect so an "extremely low-pressure system" is a vacuum?

It's not about magic it's about natural compressive force between all molecules of varying layering and breakdown, with no free space.

It is about magic, as you have no explanation at all, and need to rely upon pure magic, multiple times, to pretend you have a system that works.
Without attractive forces and free space, there is no reason for liquids to suddenly change into gas, with such drastically different properties.

The fight is simple enough to imagine.
Molecules vibrating under varying degrees of frequencies based on their molecular layering of continual expansion and compression.
You cannot have compression without expansion and you cannot have expansion without decompression.

Which in no way explains anything.

It requires all molecules to be attached with no free space.

No, it doesn't. You are yet to demonstrate any fault with the idea of free space, which actually explains things.

No. Gases have the properties they do because they're allowed to expand against other gases and liquids and such, to then be compressed into the Atmospherically stacked layering they eventually take up based on their own molecular breakdown of their own molecular layering. (Think gobstopper analogy).

This explains nothing.

Here is an example of an actual explanation:
Liquids have molecules that are close together. This results in the attractive forces between molecules being significant. This holds the molecules together.
If enough energy is provided these molecules can overcome the attractive forces and break free, where there are then large regions of free space between the molecules, making the attractive forces insignificant.

This large amount of free space means the gases are quite compressible, as you are just removing that free space.
But liquids, with negligible free space are not anywhere near as compressible, because the majority of the space is physically taken up by the molecule.

The attractive forces which need to be overcome vary depending on molecule, as they have different sizes, and different polarity. This results in some species becoming gas at very low temperatures, while others become gas at much higher temperatures.

Notice how it actually explains, including contrasting liquids and gases. And different substances?

Compare this to your "explanation".
You claim that gases are the way they are as they are allowed to expand against other molecules.
What is allowing this?
Remember, you claim there is no such thing as pull. So why can't liquids expand? What is stopping them?

I have done it many times

No, you haven't.
You have provided vague claims which explain nothing, and more specific claims which have been refuted.

people like yourself are never going to even try to understand it because you class anything against your indoctrinated beliefs as more of an insult and I'm fine with that so I'm under no illusions about you wanting to grasp anything or admitting you do.

And there you go with more dishonesty.
The reason no one other than yourself "understands" is because you can't explain.

It isn't things going against reality which is the insult, it is you continually pulling this shit. Because you can't explain anything, you just resort to insults, falsely claiming I am indoctrinated because I don't accept your garbage.

There can never be free space

Repeatedly asserting the same dishonest BS will not help you.
If you want to assert such a blatant lie, then explain WHY?
What magic makes free space impossible.
Don't just assert your delusional fantasy, explain why free space itself is impossible, even as a hypothetical.

And again, notice how you just latch onto free space, and rage at it, rather than even attempting to address the issue?

Again, free space directly explains the vastly different compressibility of gases vs liquids.
Gases are so compressible because of the free space.
You can simply reduce the free space, and bring the molecules closer together.
Liquids have very little free space, so take tremendous force to push them together.

How do you try to explain it? MAGIC!

Molecular breakdown. Layering peeling from the molecule. (Gobstopper analogy)
Think carefully about it.

I have thought about it. It explains NOTHING!
Again, rather than even attempt an explanation, you just spout vague garbage.

The crux is simple. Free space does not exist

It is quite simple.
You hate reality, so you reject it at all costs.
You can't explain why free space can't exist, nor can you provide a viable alternative.
So you just baselessly assert free space can't exist, and provide vague BS which explains nothing.

For this issue, free space explains it trivially, yet you can't explain it at all.

Free space explains what is observed in reality. Your delusional BS does not, and you have no viable alternative for free space.