Experiment ideas to prove Denpressure?

Quote from: Smoke Machine on September 15, 2023, 09:06:57 PM

Newton thought it was a direct pulling effect. Einstein thought it was a direct pushing effect.

If I recall correctly, Newton believed in an aether, and thought that was responsible for gravity.

So that would be more pushing.
But the standard model prior to Einstein had a field.
Einstein has curvature of spacetime, so objects aren't pushed or pulled.

Quote from: Smoke Machine on September 15, 2023, 09:06:57 PM

So, if Newton is correct, and gravity increases as you approach the centre of a physical object, a person should weigh more at that 12 kilometer depth than they do on Earth's surface, yes?
But, if Einstein is correct, and the gravity we feel is maximised on Earth's surface - the extremity of the surface of the physical object - where space is most warped, space becomes less warped as you approach the centre of the object. Makes sense?

No, it doesn't.
Regardless of which you use, the change in gravity with depth depends on the variation in density with depth.

Does an aether pull, push, or just move smaller obfects closer to larger ones? Likewise, if objects aren't being pushed or pulled due to gravity, what is happening to them? Is curvature of space around an object instead just moving smaller objects closer to the object?

So, you're also saying if any of the layers of Earth crust is much denser than the land on the surface where the hole is drilled, that space is more "curved" and a person's weight could go up, there? Yet, the general consensus from the globe earth "storytellers" is a person would float around weightless in the dead centre of planet earth?

I raised this because I know these results aren't theoretical. I know there will be peer reviewed scientific papers detailing exactly the results of experiments with weight variations and earth density and gravity variations down, around, and at the bottom of a 10 kilometre shaft.

Does an aether pull, push, or just move smaller obfects closer to larger ones? Likewise, if objects aren't being pushed or pulled due to gravity, what is happening to them?

According to sceptimatic….

There can never be forces of attraction, only forces of compression and decompression.

😁

Drawn in my mind means either, pulled, pushed, or moved - attracted to.

Sceptimatic, are you going to do the experiment I proposed, with bottles of your iced tea or bottles of iced coffee to try and prove your denpressure model? Or, am i getting too close to the truth for you, and you'll come up with another excuse not to?

As to the experiments with a 10 kilometre shaft, I can predict your conspiracy handicap will kick in, meaning any experiments already conducted and those results, must be fake to you, and cannot be accepted. Again, an easy experiment for yourself to do, if seriously wanting to prove an element of your denpressure gravity theory.

Are you saying denpressure is the  warping of atmosphere, caused by displacement by an object? But that implies atmosphere is warping around each individual object but doesn't explain how objects on Earth or above it, are moved to the earth's surface due to being wrapped in warped atmosphere?

This is instead of space warping due to being displaced by a dense object and creating a measurable movement effect towards the Earth. You've cleverly twisted Einstein's curvature of space theory to be a curvature of atmosphere theory, which I must have missed earlier. It's a nice touch, saying everything is permeated by atmosphere, or air molecules, and hence why any vacuum cannot exist. It loosely ties together at least.

Have you ever seen air warping around anything? Why can't we feel this warping of air, Sceptimatic? Why can't we measure this warping of air, and what does that even mean to your denpressure theory in relation to objects being attracted to the ground? Atmosphere is comprised of air molecules, you must agree upon this. All air molecules can be measured.

You must be implying your Earth cell was full of air to start with, like the inner tube of a bicycle tyre, and the land of Flattish cell Earth was inserted, injected, into the cell, causing an air displacement inside an already pressurised cell environment? Thus, crushing us all down to Earth's surface, yes?

But, if this pressure from the atmosphere is great enough to keep pushing us down to the ground, it should be great enough to enable us to scale vertical objects, nearer to the dome wall, where the air pressure starts to go sideways, as effortlessly as spider-man. It would enable us to walk up the dome and ultimately be walking around on the dome roof upside down, due to the air pressure, yes? So, why has nobody ever done this?

Think it through, Sceptimatic. Being sceptical automatically, also applies to your own theory, yes?

I see you have recognised you have no way out for the tube, so you have given up.

Again, ultimately it come down to 2 options.
Either pressurised air can magically be contained inside an open tube, or rockets can work in a vacuum.

Which one are you going to pick?

The only way I can explain down is by picturing each layer of balls having one less layer in each ball in each stacked layer all the way up.

Which is just describing down, not explaining it.

Why should each layer of balls have one less layer inside each ball than the layer below?

Now you throw a bowling ball in which has a bigger size but also a lot more layers. Let's assume it has 500 layers and that ball is within the middle of the other balls and has now displaced all those balls by its dense mass of size and layering.
Those smaller balls are compressed all around a little bit more than they were and are now vibrating more because they are under more compression and are trying to decompress but in doing so manage to crush back on the bowling ball but can't and with it being denser, the crush can only be against more resistance around and below it, not less above.

So the crush is going up? With the more dense balls crushing more than the less dense balls?

Let's use your rock.
Imagine a box, empty to look in but you know it's full of atmospheric pressure.
Ok, you now place the rock inside of that box. Now imagine you do this without losing the initial pressure already inside.
The rock displaces the atmosphere and creates more pressure inside the box. It creates an extra force within from its own dense mass minus its internal volume.

It compresses the gas. The force is initially coming from whatever force compressed the gas.
It is NOT coming from the density of the rock.
We can also see that regardless of the density of the rock, the volume of the rock is what determines that extra force.

Put your mind to work.

We have. You should try it some time.

It doesn't matter if you set it remotely or whatever, the scale will still have offered negative pressure upon it. Only you have zeroed it from what you would clearly see as negative.

Again, it actually gets a positive reading, from the lack of a buoyant force pushing the scale plate up.

Regardless, even if it did magically get a negative reading, why wouldn't that be a constant, such that when zeroed, it is taken care of and any additional force would be the same?

It's a crush back all around to any dense mass.

Notice:
"ALL AROUND"

So the question is where is this crush strongest?
The region below with high pressure gas pushing up?
Or the region above with low pressure pushing down?

Thinking about it leads to higher pressure -> higher crush -> object pushed up.

Lowering of of resistance.

What resistance?
Remember, in your fantasy, this resistance is what is pushing things down. So if that lowers it should weigh less.

Gravity is a con job to make people think it offers extra to a pressured atmosphere.

Gravity is currently the best explanation we have.
There is nothing to indicate it is a con.
You have nothing to show any fault with it.
You are entirely incapable of providing a viable alternative.

Stacked molecular layering.

Again, the stack, with greater pressure below, means they should go up, not down.

It comes down to the dense mass of any object against the resistance under it.

This only makes sense with a downwards force proportional to mass and an upwards force not proportional to mass.
Such a situation explains why heavy things fall, while low density things float.
If it is all air, there is no reason for this at all.

So the question remains, why can't a dense object be placed against the lower surface of a more dense table, and have it sit there against that dense foundation?
Why does it instead fall away?

More dense mass displacement of atmosphere creating a crush back against less resistance to it.

Again, in normal atmosphere (without the table) less resistance is up. So objects should be "crushed" up.
Not down.

There can never be forces of attraction, only forces of compression and decompression.

Why?

Drawn in your mind means pulled and that cannot happen in reality.

Yet it is what is observed. So your claims don't match reality.

I recognise the story of the fiction.

You dismiss it as fiction.

I'll tell you what does make sense and Einstein's name has been used to skew reality in my opinion because warped space is entirely what denpressure actually is

So you are now claiming denpressure is curvature of space time, not the air magically pushing?

How do you think the bowling ball was placed into that area when you know its dense mass is massively greater?

How about dropped in from the top, through a tube which is just wide enough for the bowling ball so it creates a nice seal around it.
Then we can even play with the length of the tube and see how with a large enough pressure difference it will hold the ball up against gravity.

Quote from: Themightykabool on September 16, 2023, 07:06:02 AM

In order for the bowling ball to gain direction is that the tennis balls on one side push more than the ones on the other.

Explain how tennis balls on the 'sky side' with less energy, push MORE on the bowling ball so that it moves towards the foundation.

First of all you need to understand the full picture, so I'll let you ponder on this.

How do you think the bowling ball was placed into that area when you know its dense mass is massively greater?
Once you get this then go back to the layers in the balls and how they are stacked.

We have to deal with this slowly if you are legitimate in wanting to grasp it.

Deal with what?
The bowling ball IS in between the tennis.
He tennisballs get crushed to make room.
Thats the analogy.

Its like hitting play in the middle of a puased movie.

So
Which way does it start to move?

Quote from: sceptimatic on September 16, 2023, 07:24:08 AM

The rock displaces the atmosphere and creates more pressure inside the box.

Only if the box is closed.   It’s because the rock takes up volume.

Now.  You said everything is a force.  How can I take a rock and use “rock force” to have the rock move itself.

Why are you asking? You said I was done so stick to it and find something better to argue.

Drawn in my mind means either, pulled, pushed, or moved - attracted to.

Sceptimatic, are you going to do the experiment I proposed, with bottles of your iced tea or bottles of iced coffee to try and prove your denpressure model? Or, am i getting too close to the truth for you, and you'll come up with another excuse not to?

I don't drink iced tea. Clearly, you aren't paying attention....or are you?
Maybe you're playing a little game of say the opposite.

As to the experiments with a 10 kilometre shaft, I can predict your conspiracy handicap will kick in, meaning any experiments already conducted and those results, must be fake to you, and cannot be accepted. Again, an easy experiment for yourself to do, if seriously wanting to prove an element of your denpressure gravity theory.

What has been proved?
What do you know about 10 km shafts?

Are you saying denpressure is the  warping of atmosphere, caused by displacement by an object?

Absolutely I am.

 But that implies  atmosphere is warping around each individual object but doesn't explain how objects on Earth or above it, are moved to the earth's surface due to being wrapped in warped atmosphere?

To understand why objects are moved to Earth's surface you first have to understand the extra energy applied to any dense mass object already displacing from the ground.
It's a massive key issue to get your head around.
It only becomes simple when you start to grasp it.
You start off fine with the above so let's see if you can grasp it further.

This is instead of space warping due to being displaced by a dense object and creating a measurable movement effect towards the Earth. You've cleverly twisted Einstein's curvature of space theory to be a curvature of atmosphere theory, which I must have missed earlier.

Have I twisted it or have I simply made a clearer mindset for what warped apace actually is?
Has a space vacuum and a warping of it been attributed to a man called Einstein?
If space is empty then how in the hell can anything warp it?

But if the atmosphere is always molecularly connected then displacement will always happen and warping will always happen.

It's a nice touch, saying everything is permeated by atmosphere, or air molecules, and hence why any vacuum cannot exist. It loosely ties together at least.

It ties together more than loosely as far as I'm concerned.

Have you ever seen air warping around anything? Why can't we feel this warping of air, Sceptimatic?

You can but mostly we take leave of our natural senses.
Every vibration is a warping. You can see this in heat and cold, it's seen as massive vibration down a hot road or seen as magnification of objects in colder weather, meaning your eyes can see things that looked farther away in warmer weather and actually look closer in colder.
Surely you've witnessed this.
If you haven't then look out to sea at rigid objects in different weathers. Make sure it's clear.
Wind turbines are a good place to start.

Most people don't really take much notice of what they see or the pressures they feel.

 Why can't we measure this warping of air, and what does that even mean to your denpressure theory in relation to objects being attracted to the ground?

We measure it every day with varying items.
Barometers and whatnot.

 Atmosphere is comprised of air molecules, you must agree upon this. All air molecules can be measured.

Give me an example of what you mean.

You must be implying your Earth cell was full of air to start with, like the inner tube of a bicycle tyre, and the land of Flattish cell Earth was inserted, injected, into the cell, causing an air displacement inside an already pressurised cell environment? Thus, crushing us all down to Earth's surface, yes?

No, it doesn;t work like an innertube.
An inner tube suggests an outer skin designed to hold the atmosphere and to expand under applied energy of pressure.
The dome is natural. It forms based entirely on the stacking and layering of molecules that start out as a dense mass of layers within each molecule on one stacked horizontal layer and the next layer of molecules will have a peeling of a layer and the next layer in the stack will have another peeling layer of a molecules and so on all the way up with each molecule in each stack having less full layers than the one before it.

There's a lot more to this but the basics have to be grasped first.
Let's see how far you get before you revert to type.

But, if this pressure from the atmosphere is great enough to keep pushing us down to the ground, it should be great enough to enable us to scale vertical objects, nearer to the dome wall, where the air pressure starts to go sideways, as effortlessly as spider-man.

The above might help you to understand why this can't happen.
I don't want to overcomplicate this so I'm leaving it to you to see if you can start putting pieces together to get a better insight.
Let's see if you can do what the usual suspects can't.
Or whether you revert to type.

 It would enable us to walk up the dome and ultimately be walking around on the dome roof upside down, due to the air pressure, yes?

No.

 So, why has nobody ever done this?

Because it doesn't work like you think.

Think it through, Sceptimatic. Being sceptical automatically, also applies to your own theory, yes?

I have thought it through. You have not.
Rushing in will not help you.

I see you have recognised you have no way out for the tube, so you have given up.

I've explained the tube and you overlooked it so we will re-engage on it when you stop trying to twist it.

Deal with what?
The bowling ball IS in between the tennis.

And how does the bowling ball get there?
It takes a fair amount of added energy to overcome the mass of tennis balls.
The energy displaces the tennis balls by compression and that added compression is added right back onto that bowling ball.

The bowling ball's entire dense mass, minus it's natural volume is displacing that amount of atmosphere and that amount of atmosphere is trying to decompress back against that bowling ball.
Once you release your added energy to keep it there, the atmosphere attempts to crush it back down.

He tennisballs get crushed to make room.
Thats the analogy.

And that's a good analogy at the basic level.
As above.

Its like hitting play in the middle of a puased movie.

So
Which way does it start to move?

As above.

My bad, missed this before.

Does an aether pull, push, or just move smaller obfects closer to larger ones? Likewise, if objects aren't being pushed or pulled due to gravity, what is happening to them? Is curvature of space around an object instead just moving smaller objects closer to the object?

So, you're also saying if any of the layers of Earth crust is much denser than the land on the surface where the hole is drilled, that space is more "curved" and a person's weight could go up, there? Yet, the general consensus from the globe earth "storytellers" is a person would float around weightless in the dead centre of planet earth?

I raised this because I know these results aren't theoretical. I know there will be peer reviewed scientific papers detailing exactly the results of experiments with weight variations and earth density and gravity variations down, around, and at the bottom of a 10 kilometre shaft.

I would say the aether, in the sense it was imagined, pushes.
It is similar to the wind, but instead of pushing based upon surface area, it somehow pushes based upon the mass.
And as the wind bears down on Earth, it is absorbed by Earth, with the wind diminishing as you go down (however the reduced area can counter that).

The space-time model doesn't have push or pull. Instead it has distorted space time, where objects just follow geodesics (inertial paths) through that curved spacetime.

As for what happens when you go down, it depends on exactly how the density varies.
You can easily consider 2 extremes.
One extreme is with virtually all the mass located right at the core, with a spherical shell of basically no mass on the outside.
This would continue to follow an inverse square law with only a minor change as you drop into the surface.

The other extreme is a hollow spherical shell with all the mass in an incredibly thin layer on the surface.
Then once you do down below the layer, the force drops to 0.

A simple non-extreme case to understand is a constant density.
With constant density, you end up with it following a law of F=k*r, where the effect of extra mass (based upon r^3) is more significant than the effect of extra distance (1/r^2).

Another simple to understand case would be constant force.
This requires mass to scale as r^2 (to cancel out the 1/r^2 for distance).
That means you need M=k*r^2, do dM/dr=2*k*r
And as that is a spherical shell, with dM=4*pi*r^2*rho*dr; this means the density needs to scale as 1/r.

The actual density profile of Earth is more complex, and results in the force increasing initially with depth, before decreasing.

But regardless of how it scales, once you reach the dead centre, it is 0 (at least as an approximation) because it is balanced, pulling in all directions.

I've explained the tube and you overlooked it so we will re-engage on it when you stop trying to twist it.

You made assertions that were challenged, with you then ignoring the refutation of your claims.

Again, the only way for you to not have a force on the tube is if you allow things to magically move with no force; or if you claim the rest of the gas will just magically compress inside the tube.

Again, the only way for the force to decrease is if the gas inside the tube is being pushed further in, or in the same direction as the tube is moving, with the tube being pushed along as well.
If all the gas is moving one way, that means the force will increase as you go further into the tube, with the tube being pushed much more than any molecule of gas.

You can't just have the force magically dissipate.

The only reasonable outcome is for the gas to be pushed one way, and the remaining gas in the tube, along with the tube getting pushed the other way.

You have no refutation of this.
You have no alternative explanation.

So don't try claiming to have explained it when you keep ignoring this.

To understand why objects are moved to Earth's surface you first have to understand the extra energy applied to any dense mass object already displacing from the ground.

And if you want to understand that, you need to understand where that energy goes/how it is stored.

We already know how air stores energy, with pressure.
For example if you get a tube, sealed at one end, and put something in it to create a seal, it then takes energy to pressurise the gas, and the gas pushes back, and as it transfers the energy back it decompresses.

This doesn't happen with air in general. When you lift an object up, the air above doesn't get compressed above the object to push it back down. Instead it flows around the object.

So that clearly isn't it.

And again, that would do the same regardless of the density of the object.

Another big thing this tells us is that there must be something keeping the air pressurised down low, otherwise it would be pushing up to equalise the stored energy.

If space is empty then how in the hell can anything warp it?

You keep confusing space with what is in space.
With relativity, space itself is warped, not things in space.
It is like the surface of a sphere compared to a flat surface.

There's a lot more to this but the basics have to be grasped first.

You mean like the basics of why it would stack in the first place?

Let's see if you can do what the usual suspects can't.

What? Mindlessly accepting your delusional BS without thinking?

And how does the bowling ball get there?

Like I said, drop it in from above, with a tube just a tiny bit larger than the ball.

The energy displaces the tennis balls by compression and that added compression is added right back onto that bowling ball.

And the above shows it is pushing the bowling ball up, not down; until it exits the tube and allows the tennis balls to flow around.

Once you release your added energy to keep it there, the atmosphere attempts to crush it back down.

Again, why down?
What magic causes this "crush" to be downwards?
Especially when the force from below pushing up is greater than the force pushing down from above.
Your claim makes no sense.

Quote from: DataOverFlow2022 on September 16, 2023, 09:41:12 AM

Quote from: sceptimatic on September 16, 2023, 07:24:08 AM

The rock displaces the atmosphere and creates more pressure inside the box.

Only if the box is closed.   It’s because the rock takes up volume.

Now.  You said everything is a force.  How can I take a rock and use “rock force” to have the rock move itself.

Why are you asking? You said I was done so stick to it and find something better to argue.

You posted everything is a force.  So if that rock I was looking at was a force.  How can it use “rock force” to move it's self.


This “compression”

It takes something like a piston in a fixed volume changing the volume of trap individual air molecules with space between, each with their own fixed size, to compress the gas to raise pressure.  The “pressure” builds because it’s trapped in an airtight chamber as volume decreases.  It forces the air molecules together while they try to disperse from one other. 

For the open atmosphere.  If there are no attractive forces.  Why would the bulk of air molecules migrate down to sea level overcoming their tendency to disperse or “decompress”?  When they could freely move from the greater pressure potential at sea level to the lower pressure potential of the upper atmosphere.


And what pressure and density did you post oxygen should completely fail to exist.  And only helium, so helium can be created and is a renewable resource in your delusion.  because I never observed such a phenomenon in operating plants. 

Quote from: Themightykabool on September 17, 2023, 06:23:57 AM

Deal with what?
The bowling ball IS in between the tennis.

And how does the bowling ball get there?
It takes a fair amount of added energy to overcome the mass of tennis balls.
The energy displaces the tennis balls by compression and that added compression is added right back onto that bowling ball.

The bowling ball's entire dense mass, minus it's natural volume is displacing that amount of atmosphere and that amount of atmosphere is trying to decompress back against that bowling ball.
Once you release your added energy to keep it there, the atmosphere attempts to crush it back down.

Quote from: Themightykabool

He tennisballs get crushed to make room.
Thats the analogy.

And that's a good analogy at the basic level.
As above.

Quote from: Themightykabool

Its like hitting play in the middle of a puased movie.

So
Which way does it start to move?

As above.

Bravo
Expertly uses the most words to explains nothing

Quote from: sceptimatic on September 17, 2023, 11:16:52 PM

Quote from: Themightykabool on September 17, 2023, 06:23:57 AM

Deal with what?
The bowling ball IS in between the tennis.

And how does the bowling ball get there?
It takes a fair amount of added energy to overcome the mass of tennis balls.
The energy displaces the tennis balls by compression and that added compression is added right back onto that bowling ball.

The bowling ball's entire dense mass, minus it's natural volume is displacing that amount of atmosphere and that amount of atmosphere is trying to decompress back against that bowling ball.
Once you release your added energy to keep it there, the atmosphere attempts to crush it back down.

Quote from: Themightykabool

He tennisballs get crushed to make room.
Thats the analogy.

And that's a good analogy at the basic level.
As above.

Quote from: Themightykabool

Its like hitting play in the middle of a puased movie.

So
Which way does it start to move?

As above.

Bravo
Expertly uses the most words to explains nothing

You'll never get any explanation with your attitude.

You'll never get any explanation with your attitude.

You don’t explain anything anyway.


At what pressure and density is it impossible in your delusion for oxygen to exist, only helium.

If there are no forces of attraction in your delusion, what makes gas molecules overcome their tendency to disperse (decompress) to attract them to sea level to bunch up in open atmosphere.  When the gas molecules want to reach equal pressure and potential.  Why this greater pressure potential at sea level in open atmosphere where the gas molecules should be free to push from greater pressure to the lower pressure of the upper atmosphere. 

Quote from: Themightykabool on September 18, 2023, 06:40:52 AM

Quote from: sceptimatic on September 17, 2023, 11:16:52 PM

Quote from: Themightykabool on September 17, 2023, 06:23:57 AM

Deal with what?
The bowling ball IS in between the tennis.

And how does the bowling ball get there?
It takes a fair amount of added energy to overcome the mass of tennis balls.
The energy displaces the tennis balls by compression and that added compression is added right back onto that bowling ball.

The bowling ball's entire dense mass, minus it's natural volume is displacing that amount of atmosphere and that amount of atmosphere is trying to decompress back against that bowling ball.
Once you release your added energy to keep it there, the atmosphere attempts to crush it back down.

Quote from: Themightykabool

He tennisballs get crushed to make room.
Thats the analogy.

And that's a good analogy at the basic level.
As above.

Quote from: Themightykabool

Its like hitting play in the middle of a puased movie.

So
Which way does it start to move?

As above.

Bravo
Expertly uses the most words to explains nothing

You'll never get any explanation with your attitude.

Havent so far from Dodger mcdodge face



Notice key words that are repeated but dont give DIRECTIONALITY.
Which was THE QUESTION.

After the dense mass of the bowling ball displaces the tennisballs.
The tennisbballs crush back.

For directionality to happen, the bowling ball must be crushed on one side MORE than the other.


What youre alluding is this:

Say bowling ball starts at the corner.
Along the foundation it is pushed.
Never goes up.
But a wall is a wall.
So tennis balls dont know rhe difference between a'sky' wall vs 'foundation' wall.
Tennis balls get crushed as the bowling ball pushes them forward.

No?

You'll never get any explanation with your attitude.

You never give any explanation, regardless of attitude.
People can treat you incredibly well, but as soon as they stop just mindlessly accepting your delusional BS, and instead dare to question it, you just resort to insults, because you can't explain anything.

You can't explain why there is a pressure gradient in the atmosphere.
You can't explain how the atmosphere magically manages to push against this pressure gradient to push things down; but only for objects more dense than the air, with other objects being pushed up as expected.
You can't explain why there are different states of matter if there is no free space and no attractive forces.
You can't explain how a chain link works without pulling forces.
You can't explain how a the gas pushing away from the tube can't move a tube in a vacuum, allowing rockets to work in a vacuum.
And so on.

Just what can you explain?

Quote from: sceptimatic on September 20, 2023, 10:52:30 PM

You'll never get any explanation with your attitude.

You don’t explain anything anyway.


At what pressure and density is it impossible in your delusion for oxygen to exist, only helium.

If there are no forces of attraction in your delusion, what makes gas molecules overcome their tendency to disperse (decompress) to attract them to sea level to bunch up in open atmosphere.  When the gas molecules want to reach equal pressure and potential.  Why this greater pressure potential at sea level in open atmosphere where the gas molecules should be free to push from greater pressure to the lower pressure of the upper atmosphere.

You gave up remember?

Quote from: sceptimatic on September 20, 2023, 10:52:30 PM

Quote from: Themightykabool on September 18, 2023, 06:40:52 AM

Quote from: sceptimatic on September 17, 2023, 11:16:52 PM

Quote from: Themightykabool on September 17, 2023, 06:23:57 AM

Deal with what?
The bowling ball IS in between the tennis.

And how does the bowling ball get there?
It takes a fair amount of added energy to overcome the mass of tennis balls.
The energy displaces the tennis balls by compression and that added compression is added right back onto that bowling ball.

The bowling ball's entire dense mass, minus it's natural volume is displacing that amount of atmosphere and that amount of atmosphere is trying to decompress back against that bowling ball.
Once you release your added energy to keep it there, the atmosphere attempts to crush it back down.

Quote from: Themightykabool

He tennisballs get crushed to make room.
Thats the analogy.

And that's a good analogy at the basic level.
As above.

Quote from: Themightykabool

Its like hitting play in the middle of a puased movie.

So
Which way does it start to move?

As above.

Bravo
Expertly uses the most words to explains nothing

You'll never get any explanation with your attitude.

Havent so far from Dodger mcdodge face

No problem. Don't waste any moire of your time. Look for something else to do.

Quote from: sceptimatic on September 20, 2023, 10:52:30 PM

You'll never get any explanation with your attitude.

You never give any explanation, regardless of attitude.

Then waste no more of your own time.

Notice key words that are repeated but dont give DIRECTIONALITY.
Which was THE QUESTION.

After the dense mass of the bowling ball displaces the tennisballs.
The tennisbballs crush back.

For directionality to happen, the bowling ball must be crushed on one side MORE than the other.


What youre alluding is this:

Say bowling ball starts at the corner.
Along the foundation it is pushed.
Never goes up.
But a wall is a wall.
So tennis balls dont know rhe difference between a'sky' wall vs 'foundation' wall.
Tennis balls get crushed as the bowling ball pushes them forward.

No?
[/quote]

Notice key words that are repeated but dont give DIRECTIONALITY.
Which was THE QUESTION.

After the dense mass of the bowling ball displaces the tennisballs.
The tennisbballs crush back.

For directionality to happen, the bowling ball must be crushed on one side MORE than the other.


What youre alluding is this:

Say bowling ball starts at the corner.
Along the foundation it is pushed.
Never goes up.
But a wall is a wall.
So tennis balls dont know rhe difference between a'sky' wall vs 'foundation' wall.
Tennis balls get crushed as the bowling ball pushes them forward.

No?

You're proving once again that you have no intention of trying to understand. This is why you're choosing your own answers to something you know nothing about and it's clear by how you go on.
Just back out and go and do something on another topic or stay on this but leave me out of it.

Quote from: Themightykabool on September 21, 2023, 06:27:38 AM

Notice key words that are repeated but dont give DIRECTIONALITY.
Which was THE QUESTION.

After the dense mass of the bowling ball displaces the tennisballs.
The tennisbballs crush back.

For directionality to happen, the bowling ball must be crushed on one side MORE than the other.


What youre alluding is this:

Say bowling ball starts at the corner.
Along the foundation it is pushed.
Never goes up.
But a wall is a wall.
So tennis balls dont know rhe difference between a'sky' wall vs 'foundation' wall.
Tennis balls get crushed as the bowling ball pushes them forward.

No?

You're proving once again that you have no intention of trying to understand. This is why you're choosing your own answers to something you know nothing about and it's clear by how you go on.
Just back out and go and do something on another topic or stay on this but leave me out of it.

So asking for specifics of explanations instead of blindly accepting what you say is having no intention to understand? 
Are you serious? 
Are you really this desperate to avoid being wrong that you just dismiss any discussion?
See kids, this is a con artist.  Intentional dishonesty, avoidance, and attempted gaslighting.  Don't be this.

Quote from: sceptimatic on September 21, 2023, 07:25:04 AM

Quote from: Themightykabool on September 21, 2023, 06:27:38 AM

Notice key words that are repeated but dont give DIRECTIONALITY.
Which was THE QUESTION.

After the dense mass of the bowling ball displaces the tennisballs.
The tennisbballs crush back.

For directionality to happen, the bowling ball must be crushed on one side MORE than the other.


What youre alluding is this:

Say bowling ball starts at the corner.
Along the foundation it is pushed.
Never goes up.
But a wall is a wall.
So tennis balls dont know rhe difference between a'sky' wall vs 'foundation' wall.
Tennis balls get crushed as the bowling ball pushes them forward.

No?

You're proving once again that you have no intention of trying to understand. This is why you're choosing your own answers to something you know nothing about and it's clear by how you go on.
Just back out and go and do something on another topic or stay on this but leave me out of it.

So asking for specifics of explanations instead of blindly accepting what you say is having no intention to understand? 
Are you serious? 
Are you really this desperate to avoid being wrong that you just dismiss any discussion?
See kids, this is a con artist.  Intentional dishonesty, avoidance, and attempted gaslighting.  Don't be this.

I'm not asking anyone to accept anything I say. All I ask is for people to try and understand my take on denpressure. That's it.
The trouble with people like you is, that you jump in with an angry head and a play to some kind of audience for back slaps.
It's pitiful but still amusing to watch.

Quote from: Themightykabool on September 21, 2023, 06:27:38 AM

Notice key words that are repeated but dont give DIRECTIONALITY.
Which was THE QUESTION.

After the dense mass of the bowling ball displaces the tennisballs.
The tennisbballs crush back.

For directionality to happen, the bowling ball must be crushed on one side MORE than the other.


What youre alluding is this:

Say bowling ball starts at the corner.
Along the foundation it is pushed.
Never goes up.
But a wall is a wall.
So tennis balls dont know rhe difference between a'sky' wall vs 'foundation' wall.
Tennis balls get crushed as the bowling ball pushes them forward.

No?

You're proving once again that you have no intention of trying to understand. This is why you're choosing your own answers to something you know nothing about and it's clear by how you go on.
Just back out and go and do something on another topic or stay on this but leave me out of it.

dodgy mcdodger doesn't want to answer the question he knows can't be answered by denpressure.

Quote from: Mikey T. on September 21, 2023, 07:37:06 AM

Quote from: sceptimatic on September 21, 2023, 07:25:04 AM

Quote from: Themightykabool on September 21, 2023, 06:27:38 AM

Notice key words that are repeated but dont give DIRECTIONALITY.
Which was THE QUESTION.

After the dense mass of the bowling ball displaces the tennisballs.
The tennisbballs crush back.

For directionality to happen, the bowling ball must be crushed on one side MORE than the other.


What youre alluding is this:

Say bowling ball starts at the corner.
Along the foundation it is pushed.
Never goes up.
But a wall is a wall.
So tennis balls dont know rhe difference between a'sky' wall vs 'foundation' wall.
Tennis balls get crushed as the bowling ball pushes them forward.

No?

You're proving once again that you have no intention of trying to understand. This is why you're choosing your own answers to something you know nothing about and it's clear by how you go on.
Just back out and go and do something on another topic or stay on this but leave me out of it.

So asking for specifics of explanations instead of blindly accepting what you say is having no intention to understand? 
Are you serious? 
Are you really this desperate to avoid being wrong that you just dismiss any discussion?
See kids, this is a con artist.  Intentional dishonesty, avoidance, and attempted gaslighting.  Don't be this.

I'm not asking anyone to accept anything I say. All I ask is for people to try and understand my take on denpressure. That's it.
The trouble with people like you is, that you jump in with an angry head and a play to some kind of audience for back slaps.
It's pitiful but still amusing to watch.

You are asking people to believe you when you make statements of fact like you do all the time.  Never, ever is it said as your opinion, even when called out.  You definitely want people to believe you, it's quite obvious. 
Yep, there you go again, trying to claim I'm angry, in an attempt to discredit my words.  Yes, don't deny that's what you are doing, you absolutely want to discredit what I say.  I've caught you in so many lies it isn't even very amusing anymore.  Queue you being insulting now.  So, I have explained it to you like any 5 year old would understand, if you want me to stop calling your bullshit out, then add that your statements are your opinion, add "I think" to the beginning of all your statements like "molecules fill all the space, there is no empty spaces".  And stop lying, point blank period full stop.  Yes you acting like any questions are the person incapable or unwilling to understand is in fact lying.  But go ahead, cry about being picked on, throw your little hissy fit that noone believes.

Quote from: DataOverFlow2022 on September 21, 2023, 03:14:12 AM

Quote from: sceptimatic on September 20, 2023, 10:52:30 PM

You'll never get any explanation with your attitude.

You don’t explain anything anyway.


At what pressure and density is it impossible in your delusion for oxygen to exist, only helium.

If there are no forces of attraction in your delusion, what makes gas molecules overcome their tendency to disperse (decompress) to attract them to sea level to bunch up in open atmosphere.  When the gas molecules want to reach equal pressure and potential.  Why this greater pressure potential at sea level in open atmosphere where the gas molecules should be free to push from greater pressure to the lower pressure of the upper atmosphere.

You gave up remember?

What exactly did I give up?

Its just pointing out the obvious that you never really answer anything.  And your model doesn’t work in the real world.

You claim you like experience.

Ever drop a full liter bottle and a half empty liter bottle and record the drop times as ask by smoke machine.

You can’t even do the most basic of experiments because it will expose you for the fraud you are. 

Then waste no more of your own time.

Then get lost.
While you remain here posting your delusional BS as if it is true, I will continue to object and ask simple questions you can't answer.
Like how does the low pressure air above an object magically overcome the high pressure air below to push an object down?

All I ask is for people to try and understand my take on denpressure. That's it.

Yet when we try, you insult us.

Again, if you want us to understand you need to explain things.
Asking questions about your model, which clearly doesn't make any sense, is trying to understand.

It's pitiful but still amusing to watch.

The pitiful one here is you.
You say you want people to try to understand, but when they do you insult them.
Be honest for once in your life. You want people to just blindly accept your delusional without thinking or understanding.

Quote from: Smoke Machine on September 16, 2023, 12:32:54 PM

Drawn in my mind means either, pulled, pushed, or moved - attracted to.

Sceptimatic, are you going to do the experiment I proposed, with bottles of your iced tea or bottles of iced coffee to try and prove your denpressure model? Or, am i getting too close to the truth for you, and you'll come up with another excuse not to?

I don't drink iced tea. Clearly, you aren't paying attention....or are you?
Maybe you're playing a little game of say the opposite.

Quote from: Smoke Machine

As to the experiments with a 10 kilometre shaft, I can predict your conspiracy handicap will kick in, meaning any experiments already conducted and those results, must be fake to you, and cannot be accepted. Again, an easy experiment for yourself to do, if seriously wanting to prove an element of your denpressure gravity theory.

What has been proved?
What do you know about 10 km shafts?

Quote from: Smoke Machine

Are you saying denpressure is the  warping of atmosphere, caused by displacement by an object?

Absolutely I am.

Quote from: Smoke Machine

 But that implies  atmosphere is warping around each individual object but doesn't explain how objects on Earth or above it, are moved to the earth's surface due to being wrapped in warped atmosphere?

To understand why objects are moved to Earth's surface you first have to understand the extra energy applied to any dense mass object already displacing from the ground.
It's a massive key issue to get your head around.
It only becomes simple when you start to grasp it.
You start off fine with the above so let's see if you can grasp it further.

Quote from: Smoke Machine

This is instead of space warping due to being displaced by a dense object and creating a measurable movement effect towards the Earth. You've cleverly twisted Einstein's curvature of space theory to be a curvature of atmosphere theory, which I must have missed earlier.

Have I twisted it or have I simply made a clearer mindset for what warped apace actually is?
Has a space vacuum and a warping of it been attributed to a man called Einstein?
If space is empty then how in the hell can anything warp it?

But if the atmosphere is always molecularly connected then displacement will always happen and warping will always happen.

Quote from: Smoke Machine

It's a nice touch, saying everything is permeated by atmosphere, or air molecules, and hence why any vacuum cannot exist. It loosely ties together at least.

It ties together more than loosely as far as I'm concerned.

Quote from: Smoke Machine

Have you ever seen air warping around anything? Why can't we feel this warping of air, Sceptimatic?

You can but mostly we take leave of our natural senses.
Every vibration is a warping. You can see this in heat and cold, it's seen as massive vibration down a hot road or seen as magnification of objects in colder weather, meaning your eyes can see things that looked farther away in warmer weather and actually look closer in colder.
Surely you've witnessed this.
If you haven't then look out to sea at rigid objects in different weathers. Make sure it's clear.
Wind turbines are a good place to start.

Most people don't really take much notice of what they see or the pressures they feel.

Quote from: Smoke Machine

 Why can't we measure this warping of air, and what does that even mean to your denpressure theory in relation to objects being attracted to the ground?

We measure it every day with varying items.
Barometers and whatnot.

Quote from: Smoke Machine

 Atmosphere is comprised of air molecules, you must agree upon this. All air molecules can be measured.

Give me an example of what you mean.

Quote from: Smoke Machine

You must be implying your Earth cell was full of air to start with, like the inner tube of a bicycle tyre, and the land of Flattish cell Earth was inserted, injected, into the cell, causing an air displacement inside an already pressurised cell environment? Thus, crushing us all down to Earth's surface, yes?

No, it doesn;t work like an innertube.
An inner tube suggests an outer skin designed to hold the atmosphere and to expand under applied energy of pressure.
The dome is natural. It forms based entirely on the stacking and layering of molecules that start out as a dense mass of layers within each molecule on one stacked horizontal layer and the next layer of molecules will have a peeling of a layer and the next layer in the stack will have another peeling layer of a molecules and so on all the way up with each molecule in each stack having less full layers than the one before it.

There's a lot more to this but the basics have to be grasped first.
Let's see how far you get before you revert to type.

Quote from: Smoke Machine

But, if this pressure from the atmosphere is great enough to keep pushing us down to the ground, it should be great enough to enable us to scale vertical objects, nearer to the dome wall, where the air pressure starts to go sideways, as effortlessly as spider-man.

The above might help you to understand why this can't happen.
I don't want to overcomplicate this so I'm leaving it to you to see if you can start putting pieces together to get a better insight.
Let's see if you can do what the usual suspects can't.
Or whether you revert to type.

Quote from: Smoke Machine

 It would enable us to walk up the dome and ultimately be walking around on the dome roof upside down, due to the air pressure, yes?

No.

Quote from: Smoke Machine

 So, why has nobody ever done this?

Because it doesn't work like you think.

Quote from: Smoke Machine

Think it through, Sceptimatic. Being sceptical automatically, also applies to your own theory, yes?

I have thought it through. You have not.
Rushing in will not help you.

Only fools rush in, Sceptimatic. I've thought way more deeply about your theory than it deserved. The outcome is always the same.

What opportunities and benefits have opened up to you in life through your flat earth fetish? Will you be a speaker at this weekend's flat earth conference in Las Vegas?

Is denpressure your crowning glory contribution to the flat earth movement? You haven't even explained how you came uo with the name, "denpressure". I assume you see the world as a pressurised den, but I shouldn't assume, should I?

So, can I ask, and this is important, do you avoid watching tv shows and movies with outer space in the plotline?

Sceptimatic, you and I, and everybody else, has never felt any atmospheric pressure pushing down on us and holding us to the Earth floor.

I thought you only believed in things you can see, hear, and feel, first-hand. Why are you believing something you can't detect with any of your senses - something you cant feel? 

It's a bit hypocritical, Sceptimatic, considering.

Quote from: Mikey T. on September 21, 2023, 07:37:06 AM

Quote from: sceptimatic on September 21, 2023, 07:25:04 AM

Quote from: Themightykabool on September 21, 2023, 06:27:38 AM

Notice key words that are repeated but dont give DIRECTIONALITY.
Which was THE QUESTION.

After the dense mass of the bowling ball displaces the tennisballs.
The tennisbballs crush back.

For directionality to happen, the bowling ball must be crushed on one side MORE than the other.


What youre alluding is this:

Say bowling ball starts at the corner.
Along the foundation it is pushed.
Never goes up.
But a wall is a wall.
So tennis balls dont know rhe difference between a'sky' wall vs 'foundation' wall.
Tennis balls get crushed as the bowling ball pushes them forward.

No?

You're proving once again that you have no intention of trying to understand. This is why you're choosing your own answers to something you know nothing about and it's clear by how you go on.
Just back out and go and do something on another topic or stay on this but leave me out of it.

So asking for specifics of explanations instead of blindly accepting what you say is having no intention to understand? 
Are you serious? 
Are you really this desperate to avoid being wrong that you just dismiss any discussion?
See kids, this is a con artist.  Intentional dishonesty, avoidance, and attempted gaslighting.  Don't be this.

I'm not asking anyone to accept anything I say. All I ask is for people to try and understand my take on denpressure. That's it.
The trouble with people like you is, that you jump in with an angry head and a play to some kind of audience for back slaps.
It's pitiful but still amusing to watch.

The problem for everyone apart from you is that ALL of your notions are in direct contradiction with reality!

How do you expect people to relate to ideas that are pure fiction being passed off as alleged facts.

Case in point, vacuums. You say they don’t exist. In reality vacuum chambers are manufactured and used for many different processes all over the world. This is quite an easy thing to fact check for any one interested to do so.

You however have no real interest in the truth so you just close your already closed iff mind and simply deny they exist.

What is there to understand? The only thing from the evidence is that you simply deny and reject reality and prefer to make up various things for reasons only known to yourself.

You have no interest in debate or the truth and only care about the fiction you have created inside your own head. That is all people need to understand.