Experiment ideas to prove Denpressure?

I can see what you're trying to do and I laugh wondering why you would waste your time making stuff up about what I said.

If your skin is just helium ice, is this documented observation wrong?

What’s the Freezing Point of Helium?


https://ctpcryogenics.com/whats-the-freezing-point-of-helium/#:~:text=Helium%20happens%20to%20be%20the,F%20can%20you%20solidify%20it.

That’s due to the fact that Helium has the lowest boiling and freezing points of any other known substance. Helium happens to be the only element that can’t be solidified or frozen at normal atmospheric pressure.

Only once you apply a pressure of 25 atmospheres at Helium’s freezing point of −458 °F can you solidify it.

To make helium ice you need pressure to increase, not decease.

I can see what you're trying to do and I laugh wondering why you would waste your time making stuff up about what I said.

Which is it.  Helium skin is something other than helium ice, liquid, gas, plasma.


Or it’s helium ice that takes 25 atmospheres of earth’s pressure to form? 

I read another source that stated 20 atmospheres of pressure or more. 

Quote from: sceptimatic on September 01, 2023, 06:00:31 AM

You could use a telescope to also study a holographic image or reflection.

That also blocks the radiation, heat, and light from the sun during a solar eclipse.

I didn't know your telescope did that.

Quote from: sceptimatic on September 01, 2023, 06:04:11 AM

I can see what you're trying to do and I laugh wondering why you would waste your time making stuff up about what I said.

Then you dome skin is nothing other than helium ice.  Just normal state of ice.

Yep. I didn't bank on you thinking a skin was human skin but never mind.

Quote from: DataOverFlow2022 on September 01, 2023, 06:13:02 AM

Quote from: sceptimatic on September 01, 2023, 06:04:11 AM

I can see what you're trying to do and I laugh wondering why you would waste your time making stuff up about what I said.

Then you dome skin is nothing other than helium ice.  Just normal state of ice.

Yep. I didn't bank on you thinking a skin was human skin but never mind.

Same evidence worded poorly.  Referring to additional evidence concerning the moon.  The moon blocks light, heat, and radiation of the sun during a solar eclipse.

Vs your skin dome?  That is magically reflective and absorbs light as needed.  And defies radar detection. 

Where do meteorites and shooting stars come from in your delusion again. 

 Yep. I didn't bank on you thinking a skin was human skin but never mind.

That your skin dome has to be an assembly of contradicts to make your delusion work in your mind.  Something that contradicts itself out of existing in reality. 

So your dome is just plane old helium ice.  Or is it ice “not quite as broken down at the foundation.”

Whatever your word salad.  If your dome is helium ice.  It would be detectable by radar.

How do you work that out?

Be bashed by comets.

What comets?
What you see up there is not rocks in my opinion. It's ice, so think on that.

Wouldn’t provide the perfect reflect surface, and wouldn’t absorb light at the same time to prevent this.

You're offering a glass in a room of light. You simply have no clue about what I'm saying.

Where do meteorites and shooting stars come from?

They are potentially a mixture of things from the dome and from the centre.

And the ice dome would act like a pressure bottle where the earth’s atmosphere would be trapped and reach near equalization.
There would be no pressure gradient. 

And this is why you pay no attention to the stacked and layered atmosphere.
If you did you wouldn't need to go over this.

And if atmosphere is all breaking down and getting locked in the ice dome, how is there any atmosphere left.

It isn't all breaking down. Only some of it does
If you paid attention you would understand this.

The density of earth’s atmosphere should be significantly reduced year to year.

As above.

Quote from: sceptimatic on September 01, 2023, 06:04:11 AM

I can see what you're trying to do and I laugh wondering why you would waste your time making stuff up about what I said.

If your skin is just helium ice, is this documented observation wrong?

Quote

What’s the Freezing Point of Helium?


https://ctpcryogenics.com/whats-the-freezing-point-of-helium/#:~:text=Helium%20happens%20to%20be%20the,F%20can%20you%20solidify%20it.

That’s due to the fact that Helium has the lowest boiling and freezing points of any other known substance. Helium happens to be the only element that can’t be solidified or frozen at normal atmospheric pressure.

Only once you apply a pressure of 25 atmospheres at Helium’s freezing point of −458 °F can you solidify it.

To make helium ice you need pressure to increase, not decease.

Not at all. Once it is in a high-stacked layer it becomes frozen as long as there is no agitation from the central energy hitting it.

Pay attention.

Quote from: Themightykabool on September 01, 2023, 04:31:36 AM

Oh

One would think he did given you two were claiming he did.

And now you think to gotcha me?

You appear to be extremely more dishonest than before

Had nothing to do with “gotcha”. 

It’s that sceptimatic has dug his hole deeper with their delusions by explicitly stating the dome skin of helium is something other than helium ice. It’s a skin in the delusion, not ice.

if it has nothing to do with a gotcha
then why put the snarky response that I (kabooL) need to listen better.

now you try to push blame over to scepti?
(note my original reflectiveness question was directed at sceppy).

you're really really dishonest



let's recap

Quote from: Themightykabool on August 31, 2023, 12:04:52 PM

how do we know how reflective helium ice is?

You can look through the posts. But sceptimatic made it clear it’s not helium ice.

Maybe you need to read what is actually posted.

yet just earlier that same day your post suggests he made such a claim:

Quote from: Timeisup on August 31, 2023, 08:40:25 AM

ON what basis do you make all those claims?

sceptimatic makes those claims on the properties of helium skin.  With no evidence helium can make a skin outside the already known properties of helium ice, liquid, gas, plasma. 

Shrugs…

Quote from: DataOverFlow2022 on September 01, 2023, 06:43:03 AM

Quote from: sceptimatic on September 01, 2023, 06:04:11 AM

I can see what you're trying to do and I laugh wondering why you would waste your time making stuff up about what I said.

If your skin is just helium ice, is this documented observation wrong?

Quote

What’s the Freezing Point of Helium?


https://ctpcryogenics.com/whats-the-freezing-point-of-helium/#:~:text=Helium%20happens%20to%20be%20the,F%20can%20you%20solidify%20it.

That’s due to the fact that Helium has the lowest boiling and freezing points of any other known substance. Helium happens to be the only element that can’t be solidified or frozen at normal atmospheric pressure.

Only once you apply a pressure of 25 atmospheres at Helium’s freezing point of −458 °F can you solidify it.

To make helium ice you need pressure to increase, not decease.

Not at all. Once it is in a high-stacked layer it becomes frozen as long as there is no agitation from the central energy hitting it.

Pay attention.

Have you ever made solid Helium?

Lets examine your responses and see just how they stack up.

You say people learn things every day. This is true. Most people who study scientific based disciplines don't do it by mimicking, thats just not true, thats you attempting to put scorn on our educational system, which after all has produced all the tech, medical advancements and infra structure you  and others enjoy. This is your first problem you make disparaging remarks about education and learning without really understanding how it actually functions. Before someone can produce new and novel knowledge they have to learn the basics.  Most disciples from craft apprenticeships to medical training use this approach. Why? because it has been shown to work. Most higher learning organisations, like universities are involved in discovering new knowledge through actual research. Thats the reality. Research that is then validated by others to test it validity.

What have You ever discovered Flatstien thats been validated by an independent individual or organisation?
What system do you use to learn?
How do you validate what you think you know?

You say you want proof for main stream science. There is plenty of proof out there if you care to look there are libraries full of proof for most questions you could ever ask.

You want to know about the actual properties of Helium, an element you have frequently referenced without actually knowing the first thing about it. Incidentally all of what you say about Helium is totally false according to actual validated research that has been published. Go look it up?

On the subject of Helium how did you perform your own research to support your claims? Given that Helium requires very specialised plant and equipment to study it what type of equipment did you use?

You wish to know about the laws of momentum, why not go and look them up they are freely available online and in most basic books on physics. It's one of the first thing students aged 11 or 12 learn in school through fairly basic experimentation.

You say you have no issues over knowledge that can be validated. How about things pretending to be knowledge that cant be validated, such as ALL your claims. You do realise that NONE of what you claim can be validated as it's all just made up.

New knowledge that has to be modified through new discoveries does not render the  old knowledge as wrong. That is your misunderstanding of how science works. While the work of Newton from the 1600's was found not to tell the whole truth was not intrinsically wrong, it just did not tell the whole story.

Speaking about being wrong then you are the expert as ALL what you say is wrong. None of what you say is even remotely true. You have never and can never provide any evidence for what you say as none exists or eve can exist. This is due to the fact that all what you say is just made up.


You say:-

"You're welcome to say my claims are empty. You can call them mental, idiotic, and whatever else you can muster.
I don't need you to do anything for me. All I ask is for those who want to argue against me then understand what it is they're arguing about against my thoughts and when asking for proof, first offer proof"


Again you ask for proof when there is all the proof you would ever need for all the thing you disagree with freely available. The total irony is ALL the things you appear to believe in have no proof whatsoever. All the things you believe in have zero proof and are just idle speculation on your part.

Proof is your biggest contradiction. You complain about proof when all the things you disagree with have mountains of proof available while the vies you subscribe to have zero proof.

A classic example is the vacuum. You have stated vacuums do not exist despite being fairly common place in both industry and research. There are facilities all over the world where whole rooms are build to be used as vacuum test facilities. Yet you maintain these facilities do not exist! More common place are uses are in medical equipment sterilisation  which is used world wide.

https://prosystem.euronda.com/vacuum-test-what-is-it-why-important/#:~:text=Vacuum%20tests%20reveal%20whether%20sterilizing,on%20each%20machine%20are%20reached.


and something more hitech.

https://phys.org/news/2022-11-video-euclid-thermal-vacuum.html

Despite the in your face proof you decide that Vacuums do not exist. Again the irony is where is your proof, as proof appears to be important for you for the existence of the dome along with its Helium skin!

Is it any wonder that your ideas like no proof denpressure are considered totally mad?

Just consider this:-

“You certainly don't appear to be interested in hearing all sides to make decisions.
I think you're swayed by the majority of arguments from global believers which outnumber those arguing against it on this forum, who have everything tailor-made to their needs via internet perusing and books and such, offering all the ammo they require to immediately fire back against anything or anyone who may offer a counter-argument. ”

This is what Flatstien said near the start of this thing, as it sure ain’t no debate.

He implies there can be a counter argument to accepted science, which is of course true. All knowledge is and must be open to question.

The problem is Flatstien does not question accepted knowledge  he just flat denies it which is a very different thing. Denial is not a sign of a thinking person it’s a sign of the ignorant.

He implied that beliefs held by the majority are suspect not because of their nature but because most people happen to hold them! Where is the logic in that? Has it not occurred  to him that most people hold conventional science to be true as it has evidence that support it. Not only that but it has been shown to work.

The irony is Flatstien has no evidence to support any of his views. Why? The answer is because none exists.

Everything he says and claims about denpressure is nonsense as it flys in the face of know physical laws. Laws that through experimentation and everyday use have been shown to work as they underpin and are used to make and operate so much of our current technological systems. If he were correct then none of these systems would operate. If he were right in his thinking then compressed gas bottles would not be able to hold any gas. Both gas and water would be leaking out every pipe and high pressure system on the planet.

While it’s good to question things doing it just based on denial then replacing it with random ideas with no scientific underpinning and evidence is not the way to do it.

Denial through gross ignorance is a sign of the feeble minded, and not the free thinker.

What comets?
What you see up there is not rocks in my opinion. It's ice, so think on that.

Yes.  Dirty snowballs with all kinds of crap in them that travel the solar system and pivot about the sun with no evidence of your dome.  With no explanation why humankind can’t make the same journeys.

You're offering a glass in a room of light. You simply have no clue about what I'm saying.

No.  Your delusion would require the dome to reflect a projection like a screen, but not cause the obvious reflections that would result. 

They are potentially a mixture of things from the dome and from the centre.

If your dome is falling apart, it’s not going to cause the perfect projections required by your delusion.  With no evidence meteorites are from hydrogen skin.  Every bit of evidence rock and minerals can travel space.  Why not humankind.

And this is why you pay no attention to the stacked and layered atmosphere.
If you did you wouldn't need to go over this.

There is no evidence of your delusion.  There is no evidence that your helium skin could exist.  There is no evidence of your dome.

It isn't all breaking down. Only some of it does
If you paid attention you would understand this.

I do pay attention.  Your posts are utter nonsense with no evidence.
How does the atmosphere push things down from less density and pressure into more density and pressure that has greater resistance without gravity.  Your delusion should make things fall up.  And your atmosphere should reach uniform pressure between foundation and the dome.  Gravity explains the pressure gradient.  Sorry. 

Quote from: DataOverFlow2022 on September 01, 2023, 06:43:03 AM

Quote from: sceptimatic on September 01, 2023, 06:04:11 AM

I can see what you're trying to do and I laugh wondering why you would waste your time making stuff up about what I said.

If your skin is just helium ice, is this documented observation wrong?

Quote

What’s the Freezing Point of Helium?


https://ctpcryogenics.com/whats-the-freezing-point-of-helium/#:~:text=Helium%20happens%20to%20be%20the,F%20can%20you%20solidify%20it.

That’s due to the fact that Helium has the lowest boiling and freezing points of any other known substance. Helium happens to be the only element that can’t be solidified or frozen at normal atmospheric pressure.

Only once you apply a pressure of 25 atmospheres at Helium’s freezing point of −458 °F can you solidify it.

To make helium ice you need pressure to increase, not decease.

Not at all. Once it is in a high-stacked layer it becomes frozen as long as there is no agitation from the central energy hitting it.

Pay attention.

There is no such thing as a ‘high stacked layer’

Neither you or anyone else has either detected or produced one. No experiment has ever been produced by you or anyone else to support the existence of this thing you call ‘a high stacked layer’.

Just saying it exists means nothing you have to prove it which for you is an impossibility.

On the other hand I can point you to countless volumes of validated evidence that totally disproves all your ideas.

You say you like evidence, Ithink you care not one jot about evidence. Your record shows all you care about is your belief and the things you deny in favour of you our half baked ideas.

Pay attention.

Have you ever made solid Helium?

Have you?

Lets examine your responses and see just how they stack up.

You say people learn things every day. This is true. Most people who study scientific based disciplines don't do it by mimicking, thats just not true, thats you attempting to put scorn on our educational system, which after all has produced all the tech, medical advancements and infra structure you  and others enjoy.

If they're studying scientific disciplines then they are basically mimicking in order to regurgitate for exam marks to gain a certificate.

This is your first problem you make disparaging remarks about education and learning without really understanding how it actually functions.

I have no issue with education as long as it's genuine reality told as that and shown as that.
I have no issue with mythical education or fiction as long as it's told as that.
I have no issue with religious education as long as it's offered as a thought and not a bullied-in concept portrayed as factual.

Before someone can produce new and novel knowledge they have to learn the basics.  Most disciples from craft apprenticeships to medical training use this approach. Why? because it has been shown to work.

Of course. Many people can fine-tune procedures and invent new technology and such. I've done it myself for long enough.

Most higher learning organisations, like universities are involved in discovering new knowledge through actual research. Thats the reality. Research that is then validated by others to test it validity.

As I said above, I have no issues in searching for proof in any way as long as it is shown to be a reality and not a fact that cannot be backed up, other than to appeal to peers and authority as some kind of shoe in fact by mass adherence to.

What have You ever discovered Flatstien thats been validated by an independent individual or organisation?
What system do you use to learn?

My brain is used to learn as anyone's is.

How do you validate what you think you know?

If it's physical I show it to work. If it's my hypothesis then I explain How it might work. I don't offer it as fact. Maybe take note of this and you won't need to go into a frenzy all of the time.

You say you want proof for main stream science. There is plenty of proof out there if you care to look there are libraries full of proof for most questions you could ever ask.

There's no proof in terms of what I'm arguing about against the spinning globe and such. You can argue all day and night that there is but you're doing it solely on acceptance by reading and peer pressure, plus CGI and so on and so on.

You may as well tell me there's plenty of proof out there for a god, but what can you offer? A bible? A shroud? A church? A figurine? A film? What?
The same goes for your global acceptance. What can you offer?

You want to know about the actual properties of Helium, an element you have frequently referenced without actually knowing the first thing about it.

And you're arguing about it without knowing anything about it.

Incidentally all of what you say about Helium is totally false according to actual validated research that has been published. Go look it up?

I'm fine thanks but you feel free to do so.

On the subject of Helium how did you perform your own research to support your claims? Given that Helium requires very specialised plant and equipment to study it what type of equipment did you use?

Maybe I didn't. Maybe someone else did. You can choose whatever suits you.

You wish to know about the laws of momentum, why not go and look them up they are freely available online and in most basic books on physics. It's one of the first thing students aged 11 or 12 learn in school through fairly basic experimentation.

Can you not explain what these laws are?

You say you have no issues over knowledge that can be validated.

None whatsoever.

How about things pretending to be knowledge that cant be validated, such as ALL your claims.

I don't offer then as fact so there's no need.

You do realise that NONE of what you claim can be validated as it's all just made up.

Isn't everything made up?

New knowledge that has to be modified through new discoveries does not render the  old knowledge as wrong.

And it doesn't make it entirely correct, either.

That is your misunderstanding of how science works.

I have no misunderstanding. I think you misunderstand.

While the work of Newton from the 1600's was found not to tell the whole truth was not intrinsically wrong, it just did not tell the whole story.

So what did Newton offer as truth?

Speaking about being wrong then you are the expert as ALL what you say is wrong.

I may well be wrong but you certainly can't prove I am.

None of what you say is even remotely true.

In your mind and you're welcome to your thoughts. It doesn;t make your words a truth, it offers you a guess.

You have never and can never provide any evidence for what you say as none exists or eve can exist.

In your mind. You may never know the end product but you will certainly think you know.

This is due to the fact that all what you say is just made up.

Everything is made up of thought. It just comes down to the physicality of whatever is made up from thought to become a reality.

You say:-

"You're welcome to say my claims are empty. You can call them mental, idiotic, and whatever else you can muster.
I don't need you to do anything for me. All I ask is for those who want to argue against me then understand what it is they're arguing about against my thoughts and when asking for proof, first offer proof"

Again you ask for proof when there is all the proof you would ever need for all the thing you disagree with freely available.
[/quote]There is no proof in terms of what I'm arguing against.
As above, there are plenty of films and books and peer pressure pushing of acceptance of stories that only offer facts in the minds of those who do not know or are in any possession of them.

The total irony is ALL the things you appear to believe in have no proof whatsoever.

In many cases I agree but that also applies to what you believe in.

All the things you believe in have zero proof and are just idle speculation on your part.

Not all but it comes down to who wants to accept what's in their face and can peer pressure offer a person a mind to accept the unreasonable for the absolute logical reasoning.

Proof is your biggest contradiction.

Nope.  There are no contradictions. Not paying attention is your biggest enemy. When I offer proof and cannot back it up, only then do your words become valid.
Merely saying I offer proof even though I repeatedly ensure I let all know that I do not offer anything as fact, means you waste your words.

You complain about proof when all the things you disagree with have mountains of proof available while the vies you subscribe to have zero proof.

All the things I disagree with have no proof. It's merely stories and pictures and films and basically, gobbledygook passed off as reality.

A classic example is the vacuum. You have stated vacuums do not exist despite being fairly common place in both industry and research.

Vacuums do not and cannot exist. Lower pressure is a reality as is higher pressure. That's it.

There are facilities all over the world where whole rooms are build to be used as vacuum test facilities.

Used as evacuation chambers under lower pressure and dependent on what is being evacuated against.
No vacuums.

Yet you maintain these facilities do not exist!

Not as vacuum chambers they don't.

More common place are uses are in medical equipment sterilisation  which is used world wide.
https://prosystem.euronda.com/vacuum-test-what-is-it-why-important/#:~:text=Vacuum%20tests%20reveal%20whether%20sterilizing,on%20each%20machine%20are%20reached.

Low pressure via natural evacuation via external higher pressure pumps.

and something more hitech.

https://phys.org/news/2022-11-video-euclid-thermal-vacuum.html

Despite the in your face proof you decide that Vacuums do not exist.

Lower pressure. No vacuum.

Again the irony is where is your proof, as proof appears to be important for you for the existence of the dome along with its Helium skin!

Use your brain. That's all I ask anyone to do.

Is it any wonder that your ideas like no proof denpressure are considered totally mad?

I do not care one iota what you or anyone thinks about what I say.
You are free to blank anything I say or free to dismiss or argue it when you understand it.

There is no such thing as a ‘high stacked layer’

Of course, to you, because you believe your Earth spins with an atmosphere that is just random acts of wind and yet a steady pressurised atmosphere up to a so-called vacuum.
So why would you think of stacking? I certainly don't expect you to, nor care.
To understand it you first have to start from scratch to get to understand it and this is where you and your forum friends fall short and basically waste your own time.
Carry on as far as I'm concerned.

Neither you or anyone else has either detected or produced one.
No experiment has ever been produced by you or anyone else to support the existence of this thing you call ‘a high stacked layer’.

It comes down to how everything is perceived and what I perceive fits the bill as close to being something worthwhile to carry on with.
I can't show you atmospheric stacking but you can see stacking in nature in more dense Earth.
It's all about doing the jigsaw and you're is already been done for you. It came in a box with the picture already set out.
All you had to do was take it out of the box to show your peers as they will show you. Your global Earth on a platter with no piecing to do.
So I understand why that becomes a truth to you. It for me until I had time to question it...and many others.

Just saying it exists means nothing you have to prove it which for you is an impossibility.

I'll relay that back to you.

On the other hand I can point you to countless volumes of validated evidence that totally disproves all your ideas.

You can certainly point me to volumes of books and stuff but you cannot offer any proof they're truthful.

You say you like evidence, Ithink you care not one jot about evidence.

I love evidence. I love to think. I love to try and find the truth of a lie or the reality of a spoken story pushed as fact. And so on.
I don't just rely on picking up a book or newspaper that tells me whatever and then proclaim the truth is within, without actually knowing.
I leave that stuff to people like yourself.

Your record shows all you care about is your belief and the things you deny in favour of you our half baked ideas.

Of course I care about what I think and yes I do favour them over your half-baked ideas.

Lot of pleading

Very low substance

So why would you think of stacking?

It doesn’t exist.  You haven’t provided any means to prove it exists.

In your delusion, things should fall up at rates based on density.  From the buoyancy of high pressure and density pushing to low pressure/density atmosphere above.

But it is worse for you.  There is no reason in your delusion that gas molecules should overcome their tendency to disperse and bunch up at sea level.  Your atmosphere should be near equalized.

Things with enough mass to make buoyancy negligible tend to fall at the same rate. Especially if you can make air resistance negligible through evacuating atmosphere out of a chamber. Or eliminate differences in air resistance by using a similar shape.



The steel ball is twenty times as dense than the ping pong ball, the steel ball should accelerate 20 times faster than the ping pong ball from the very moment of release in your delusions.  Why does that not occur? 

We all accept a lot of things of which we have no direct proof.

However, most of these things will have evidence and logical arguments to support them.
You have neither.

It's all about what offers the best evidence that maybe fits a jigsaw piece by logically sifting through instead of simply buying into stories that offer something as factual but cannot be proved by the average bear.

And your nonsense does not.
Your nonsense can be disproven by the average bear.
And there are plenty of examples of evidence that strongly support a RE which the average bear can do as well.

Your arguments are based entirely on a belief system installed into your brain by severe schooling in this kind of stuff.

No. My argument is built upon logical thought and evidence.
2 things your position lacks entirely.

Again, logical thought and evidence clearly demonstrates that air pushes from high pressure to low pressure.
Yet you entirely reject this and instead claim that low pressure air above an object magically pushes the object down into high pressure.

You are the one operating entirely from a delusional belief system, not me.

And yes I am having a small dig because it's the truth.

No, you are having a dig because you are desperate to reject reality.

You, in your mind, believe you know everything because the books offer you a belief system

Wrong again.
I believe the vast majority of what I do because of evidence which supports it, including evidence I have gathered myself; and the system logically working to predict what occurs in reality.
And because no one has been able to offer a rational argument against it.

But I don't simply accept everything in books.
For example, I have serious questions about the claim that gravity travels at the speed of light. If it does, what does that mean for a black hole? If light can't escape that means gravity shouldn't be able to either. But there is the complication of light needing to be continually emitted vs a gravitational field.

And if you deny this then you have to offer physical proof to the contrary and convince me

You reject everything that is provided to you.
Me providing it to you will be just like anyone else.
You have shown you have no interest at all in accepting any evidence.
So why would I waste my time?

You aren't even willing to answer trivial questions which destroy your delusional garbage.

Nothing I could provide would change any mindset you have and I'm well aware of that.

Because nothing you provide comes anywhere close to evidence or a rational argument in favour of your nonsense, nor even an explanation.

If you could, we wouldn't be having this discussion.

And also notice how you just believe all this delusional BS about me, with absolutely nothing to support it?
And the most likely reason why is so you have a pathetic excuse to dismiss anything I say, because you cannot rationally defend your garbage.

If you want to disagree, then try to prove me wrong. Answer the simple question you have avoided for so long it isn't funny.
How does the low pressure air above magically overcome the higher pressure air below to push an object down?

Until you can answer this, your delusional BS is DOA.

To whom it may concern:-

Have I made solid Helium? Are you mad? of course not it needs highly specialised facilities. What I know about Helium is what Ive read that others have discovered. It appears what you imagine you know about Helium, is stuff you have just made up. Thats the problem in a nutshell. You deny real knowledge in favour of stuff you just make up.

IN reality there is no way you could ever study helium in its liquid or solid state.

You keep ranting on about CGI. That is just your way of denial.  You have no real evidence or open mind  instead all you do is denial followed by making stuff up with no evidence.

If you want to know the laws used in engineering then go look them up Im not your teacher though heaven knows you need one as you appear to be pretty ignorant about the basic physical laws. If you cared about knowing the truth about the physical laws you could easily look it up.

You contradict yourself all the time:-

I said
"You say you have no issues over knowledge that can be validated"

You said
"None whatsoever"

Your actions fly in the face of all what else you say. None of what you claim is validated yet all of which you deny can be validated.

You then say there is no need to validate your own claims! It's not a case of not needing to it's a case of you not being able to validate because they are all nonsense. Thats why you are unable to validate anything you claim.

You say:-

"You can certainly point me to volumes of books and stuff but you cannot offer any proof they're truthful"

What you fail to understand is much of what these text books contain is put into practice and shown to work and be true. Just look around you at the world and all its technology. Where do you imagine it came from? Do you not understand that simple basic fact. If all these facts in all those books were not true nothing on the planet would work as it currently does. Technology and engineering are based on all those scientific discoveries and laws that are explained in all those books. Likewise if your idea of denpressure and stacked layers were true bottles of compressed gas could not exist. This is a fact that you ignore time and time again. The simple fact that compressed gas bottles do exist means that all you say about denpressue is wrong. Just like how you choose to ignore the existence of vacuums.They are real but you choose to deny that reality.  The fact that you are unable to understand the consequences of what you choose to believe just proves how little you know about the physical laws that govern our world. Ignorance by any other name.

You appear to image that science has decided to produce all these laws rather than having 'discovered' them as they were there all the time whether we knew they were there or not.

You appear to think you can just make up any old crap and because you happen to believe it it is made into a truth. And you say you have an open mind and care about the truth. In reality you know nothing about the truth.

No one has made these laws they were discovered and that is another fact you fail to understand. People did not make the laws based on any belief they had instead they observed the world and recorded how it worked. We did not impose the laws on the world they were already here, we just discovered them.

You on the other hand invent things based on belief that have no place in reality and have nothing to do with truth or how the physical laws of the world world actually work. Im sorry to say it's pure ignorance on your part that is preventing you from seeing what the truth is.

You on the other hand invent things based on belief that have no place in reality and have nothing to do with truth or how the physical laws of the world world actually work. Im sorry to say it's pure ignorance on your part that is preventing you from seeing what the truth is.

There are numerous people out there who offer nothing more than a thought process about all kinds of things that nobody can genuinely prove.
It comes down to how much of an authority each person thinks the thinker is...and that's basically it.

My thoughts are simply that.
You can shout from the rooftops that they mean nothing to you and even pretend they mean nothing to everyone alive and it changes nothing.
It offers you no truth in your argument against me, except just an argument for the sake of it, which is fine by the way.

You have no clue about helium so don't pretend you do. You are welcome to say I don't but my reasoning is in with denpressure and how I think Earth may be as a cell.

I don't expect you to believe one word nor do I expect you to bother to understand my thinking.

To be totally honest I'm baffled as to why you would waste your time on a numbskull like me.
Don't you feel embarrassed?

There are numerous people out there who offer nothing more than a thought process about all kinds of things that nobody can genuinely prove.

Hello..



Den pressure delusion, the steel ball should accelerate twenty times faster being twenty times more dense than the ping pong ball.  Your model doesn’t represent reality at all.  Den pressure delusion can’t be demonstrated because it’s a creation of your delusion.

Quote from: Timeisup on September 03, 2023, 12:01:53 AM

You on the other hand invent things based on belief that have no place in reality and have nothing to do with truth or how the physical laws of the world world actually work. Im sorry to say it's pure ignorance on your part that is preventing you from seeing what the truth is.

There are numerous people out there who offer nothing more than a thought process about all kinds of things that nobody can genuinely prove.
It comes down to how much of an authority each person thinks the thinker is...and that's basically it.

My thoughts are simply that.
You can shout from the rooftops that they mean nothing to you and even pretend they mean nothing to everyone alive and it changes nothing.
It offers you no truth in your argument against me, except just an argument for the sake of it, which is fine by the way.

You have no clue about helium so don't pretend you do. You are welcome to say I don't but my reasoning is in with denpressure and how I think Earth may be as a cell.

I don't expect you to believe one word nor do I expect you to bother to understand my thinking.

To be totally honest I'm baffled as to why you would waste your time on a numbskull like me.
Don't you feel embarrassed?

Do you own and run a car with an internal combustion engine?

Are you are of the physical laws of nature that determine how that engine works?

Are you aware your own beliefs are in conflict with those very laws of nature?

If what you thought were true then internal combustion engines would not function.

As I previously stated no compressed gas bottle on earth OR pressured system would be able to operate are they do if what you believed were the case.

The biggest argument against your beliefs is the every day reality of things working despite what you believe.

The problem is you are too strap and close minded to stop and think about the actual implications of what you believe in relation to the nonsense that is denpressure.

The fact that you totally ignore reality and how things actually work in favour of your crazy ideas says much about you.

Explain the fact that vacuum chambers are common place in most hospitals. If you have had an operation then a sterilising uint using a vacuum would have been used to sterilise the equipment. If you really were open minded you would investigate this. The fact that you are driven by denial will most likely lead you to deny this.

Compressed gas bottles and compressed systems. Explain how they work under denpressure? In your work that would all be leaking like sieves.

Internal combustion engines how do they work under denpressure especially diesel engines which require a much higher compression ratio than petrol engines top to 22:1. In your world internal combustion engines would not work.

In your world no compressed would ever work.

Please explain?

Quote from: Timeisup on September 03, 2023, 12:01:53 AM

You on the other hand invent things based on belief that have no place in reality and have nothing to do with truth or how the physical laws of the world world actually work. Im sorry to say it's pure ignorance on your part that is preventing you from seeing what the truth is.

There are numerous people out there who offer nothing more than a thought process about all kinds of things that nobody can genuinely prove.
It comes down to how much of an authority each person thinks the thinker is...and that's basically it.

My thoughts are simply that.
You can shout from the rooftops that they mean nothing to you and even pretend they mean nothing to everyone alive and it changes nothing.
It offers you no truth in your argument against me, except just an argument for the sake of it, which is fine by the way.

You have no clue about helium so don't pretend you do. You are welcome to say I don't but my reasoning is in with denpressure and how I think Earth may be as a cell.

I don't expect you to believe one word nor do I expect you to bother to understand my thinking.

To be totally honest I'm baffled as to why you would waste your time on a numbskull like me.
Don't you feel embarrassed?

I admit all I know about Helium is through reading on the subject.

What specialised knowledge do you have?

How did you obtain this knowledge?

Quote from: sceptimatic on September 03, 2023, 04:23:34 AM

There are numerous people out there who offer nothing more than a thought process about all kinds of things that nobody can genuinely prove.

Hello..



Den pressure delusion, the steel ball should accelerate twenty times faster being twenty times more dense than the ping pong ball.  Your model doesn’t represent reality at all.  Den pressure delusion can’t be demonstrated because it’s a creation of your delusion.

It would be over vertical distance, not from small heights.

You just need to understand denpressure to get why and you know absolutely nothing about it to even argue, except to argue for the fiction of gravity.

It would be over vertical distance, not from small heights.

You just need to understand denpressure to get why and you know absolutely nothing about it to even argue, except to argue for the fiction of gravity.

What?

Makes no sense.  In den pressure delusional, why isn’t the steel ball twenty times the density of the ping pong ball accelerating downward twenty times the rate of the ping pong ball from the very instance of being released. 

Maybe it has something to do with the force of gravity from the earth that is so much more massive than either the ping pong ball or the steel ball.

There are numerous people out there who offer nothing more than a thought process about all kinds of things that nobody can genuinely prove.

And there are those that can provide things that almost anyone can prove.
Yet you cling to those focusing on the abstract so you can pretend to be right; while ignoring those who can show you are wrong.

It would be over vertical distance, not from small heights.

And doing so just further demonstrates the problem with your delusional BS.

Initially, they start accelerating at basically the same rate.
Yet after long enough, the ping pong ball decreases its rate of acceleration to almost 0, while the steel ball continues to accelerate.
This makes no sense at all in your fantasy.
Why is there a different terminal velocity?
And if there is, why don't they start off with different rates of acceleration?

This makes sense if the air is resisting the motion, with a force based upon surface area; with something entirely separate from the air accelerating the objects downwards with a force proportional to mass.

You just need to understand denpressure to get why and you know absolutely nothing about it to even argue, except to argue for the fiction of gravity.

No, those who understand denpressure realise it is complete garbage that doesn't work.
And then you refuse to interact with those who do understand it, because doing so would require admitting gravity (or something quite like it) is real.

All because you are entirely incapable of answering a trivial question which shows your fantasy is garbage.

Again, we know the air pressure is greater below the object.
So how does the low pressure air above push overcome the high pressure air below to force the object down?
This makes no sense at all.

To further destroy it; why does this only happen if an object is dense enough, with a low enough density resulting in the force below pushing the object up?
And why does this pressure gradient exist at all? Why doesn't the high pressure air below push the low pressure air up to remove the pressure gradient?
If you try adding extra compressed air in, that is roughly what happens, with the extra pressure pushing the air away until you are just left with the pressure gradient.
And this pressure gradient is directly proportional to the density of the fluid.

Again, it makes no sense at all.

But if we discard your delusional fantasy, and instead accept a force proportional to mass acting downwards, it all makes sense.
The pressure gradient is from this downwards force, which is why it is proportional to the mass of the fluid.
This acts to pull all objects down, and at the same rate. However, a fluids resistance to motion will change that.
And in addition, the upwards buoyant force from air pressure pushes the objects upwards, so if gravity acting directly on the object is greater, it goes down; but if the buoyant force is greater, it goes up.

This all makes sense, and you cannot show any fault with it. Instead you just dismiss it as "gravity is fiction", or "there is no such thing as pull", yet you cannot justify either of those claims of yours, claims you repeatedly assert as facts.

Do you own and run a car with an internal combustion engine?

I do.

Are you are of the physical laws of nature that determine how that engine works?

I'm aware of how they work, yes. They work very well under denpressure.

Are you aware your own beliefs are in conflict with those very laws of nature?

Not at all. My thoughts are well in line with how they work as all other things.

If what you thought were true then internal combustion engines would not function.

You have absolutely no clue what I think because you've taken little to no time to understand how and why, which is why you offer this gunk.

As I previously stated no compressed gas bottle on earth OR pressured system would be able to operate are they do if what you believed were the case.

They operate fine under pressure as do all things we see.

The biggest argument against your beliefs is the every day reality of things working despite what you believe.

They work because of what I believe. There's nothing against what I believe.

The problem is you are too strap and close minded to stop and think about the actual implications of what you believe in relation to the nonsense that is denpressure.

I don't have a problem despite you thinking it is a problem.

The fact that you totally ignore reality and how things actually work in favour of your crazy ideas says much about you.

I don't ignore reality I simply make more sense of what reality is. Gravity has no place in reality except as a notion on a fiction shelf.
It offers no reality to anything which is why nobody understands it at all and cannot explain it.
There's a good reason for that and that's because it hides what atmospheric pressure does for all things relating to Earth and living things, as well as dense mass displacement of it.

Explain the fact that vacuum chambers are common place in most hospitals.

Easy. It's low-pressure chambers or high-pressure chambers. No vacuums exist.

If you have had an operation then a sterilising uint using a vacuum would have been used to sterilise the equipment.

Low pressure or high pressure. No vacuums exist and never can.

If you really were open minded you would investigate this.

I have in my own way and I stand by what I say.

The fact that you are driven by denial will most likely lead you to deny this.

I'm driven by finding potentials and truths from stories told that offer very questionable narratives.

Compressed gas bottles and compressed systems. Explain how they work under denpressure?

Gases are forced into a container under high pressure and held in that container.
Theyy work because oof denpressure.
How do you think they work?  Fictional gravity? If so then explain.

In your work that would all be leaking like sieves.

Not at all. Try and understand denpressure and you may have a better idea. It shows you know nothing about denpressure.

Internal combustion engines how do they work under denpressure especially diesel engines which require a much higher compression ratio than petrol engines top to 22:1. In your world internal combustion engines would not work.

They work by allowing the atmosphere to blend with the fuel to cause combustion via a spark plug or super friction in terms of the diesel.
What do you think they work from?

In your world no compressed would ever work.

Please explain?

We are all under compression and all things are under compression. The only difference is in how much compressive force for each object.
It would help if you knew denpressure even a little bit to get you going.


As it stands you're basically at zero because you have no intention of understanding it because your goal is to deny anything that goes against mainstream views/ideals.

This is why I find it strange that you bother wasting your time.
I'm sure you'll make some gunk up like, I'm here to make sure people don't fall for your story.

Laughable.

I admit all I know about Helium is through reading on the subject.

What specialised knowledge do you have?

How did you obtain this knowledge?

It doesn't matter what specialised knowledge I may or not have. You admit your argument is based entirely on reading up on a story that you simply take as your expertise based on appeals to those stories as your authority.

Quote from: sceptimatic on September 03, 2023, 06:36:52 AM

It would be over vertical distance, not from small heights.

You just need to understand denpressure to get why and you know absolutely nothing about it to even argue, except to argue for the fiction of gravity.

What?

Makes no sense.  In den pressure delusional, why isn’t the steel ball twenty times the density of the ping pong ball accelerating downward twenty times the rate of the ping pong ball from the very instance of being released.

You've already been told. It is more dense and it would fall at a higher rate than the ping pong ball over distance.
You still rely on the short drop to argue a so-called equal land, which is not the entire truth and you know it.

Maybe it has something to do with the force of gravity from the earth that is so much more massive than either the ping pong ball or the steel ball.

Maybe it has something to do with dense mass displacement and not fictional gravity.