REMINDER: THE ARENA PLATFORM, INC. has no obligation to monitor the Forums. However, THE ARENA PLATFORM, INC. reserves the right to review any materials submitted to or posted on the Forums, and remove, delete, redact or otherwise modify such materials, in its sole discretion and for any reason whatsoever, at any time and from time to time, without notice or further obligation to you. THE ARENA PLATFORM, INC. has no obligation to display or post any materials provided by you. THE ARENA PLATFORM, INC. reserves the right to disclose, at any time and from time to time, any information or materials that we deem necessary or appropriate to satisfy any applicable law, regulation, contract obligation, legal or dispute process or government request. Click on the following hyperlinks to further read the applicable Privacy Policy and Terms of Use.
Mars Rover: Real or Fake?
- Thread starter enframed
- Start date
OK, you've clearly spent too much time arguing with 'flat Earthers' and you apparently have not been able to grasp some of the most obvious points in favor of these nonstop, antiscience appeals to authority.
Real quick... what does gravity have to do with gas pressure, let alone a physical container?
Are you aware that when you open a gas container here on Earth that you will find that as the gas finds equilibrium, that it does this in all directions. This is important because when you claim gravity is doing anything here on our Earth that you are simultaneously claiming a downward (towards the center of our sphere in your world) bias.
For clarity, no downward bias equals no gravity.
This whole thread exemplifies how easy it is to fool people, while also illustrating how difficult it is to then convince these same people that they have been fooled.
Later
I’d like a more specific explanation if your “if you open a gas container” hypothetical. can you give us a detailed rundown? Type of gas, amount of gas, pressure, volume etc? The kooky scientists have all sorts of complex mathematical equations to precisely discuss stuff like equilibrium of gasses so I’m sure you do too?
Could have been the next Fall record.
This seems pretty fucking important. Is he talking about gas in a natural state or some other form? Gas, or gaslight?
gas has mass...it is matter
it is subject to the effects of gravity
this is not an appeal to authority fallacy, it's a statement substantiated by scientific
experimentation
you and Bother continue to equate the behavior of a container at sea level (or thereabouts)
with the behavior of gasses of different masses at high altitude where they are no longer
subject to the same gravitational effects
this is not a valid scientific comparison
LOL! Why dafuq would they?
OK, for the sake of absolute clarity... for the exact same reason that air bubbles rise through water and that water droplets fall through air.
If you didn't get this in school, just google it. And again, for clarity, within any container on Earth these particles will behave the exact same way.
...gases always spread out in all directions to fill the container into which they are placed. This spreading out of gases to fill all the available space is called diffusion.
ExamLearn
Any gas at a temperature higher than zero kelvins. In other words... any.
Indeed
According to current mainstream beliefs though, it isn't. See above...
It is an appeal to authority fallacy and clearly so. Until you go ahead and demonstrate a repeatable experiment that proves that gravity is responsible for gas particles hitting the bottom of their container harder than any other wall, that is all it will be. Good luck with that.
Wow, keep this thinking up and you'll be a flat Earther in no time. The mainstream cult of scientism claims that it is their imagined gravity that keeps our atmosphere from reaching equilibrium with their imagined infinite vacuum space. This is at the highest levels where as you point out, gravity should be the weakest. Again, here on Earth gas particles move in all directions randomly, with no downward bias. But at the same time this magical force, at some altitude that nasa still refuses to define, is powerful enough to hold our atmosphere perfectly as it is spinning faster than sound...
against a 10^-17 Torr vacuum!
For comparison sake, nasa claims their chamber can only reach 4×10^–6 Torr and is enclosed in several tons of cement and steel:
The antecedent for gas pressure is still a container... bottom line.
helium or
it’s false that 2 different gasses will diffuse exactly the same.
also, you’re still being vague on your container example. First you spoke of opening the container but now you’re speaking of how gasses will behave inside the container?
will helium and neon act identically In these hypotheticals of yours?
The magic gravity saves the day!
Not....
Gas pressure wins every time....
The external higher atmospheric pressure air is trying to get to (i.e equalize with) the tiny bit of lower pressure air inside the glass above the water when it is turned upside down. ....and if the seal is broken the air rushes upward to the low pressure area above the water....pushing the water out of the way....before it starts to leak out.
Simple demonstrable proof that air pressure wins over any "gravity"....every time....
You assertion is false Afoaf.
Atdabeach....I think your suggestion that we should be able to measure higher pressure on the bottom wall / floor of the container vs the sides...if gravity does indeed hold earth's atmosphere from equalizing with the vacuum of space....is a good one. Good luck with that indeed.
Unless the claim is demonstrated by experiment....it's wrong.
Anyone want to tackle the mechanical gyroscope as a horizon indicator for flying around a curved surface problem?
Seems it's being avoided for some reason.....hmmmm?
Not....
Gas pressure wins every time....
The external higher atmospheric pressure air is trying to get to (i.e equalize with) the tiny bit of lower pressure air inside the glass above the water when it is turned upside down. ....and if the seal is broken the air rushes upward to the low pressure area above the water....pushing the water out of the way....before it starts to leak out.
Simple demonstrable proof that air pressure wins over any "gravity"....every time....
You assertion is false Afoaf.
Atdabeach....I think your suggestion that we should be able to measure higher pressure on the bottom wall / floor of the container vs the sides...if gravity does indeed hold earth's atmosphere from equalizing with the vacuum of space....is a good one. Good luck with that indeed.
Unless the claim is demonstrated by experiment....it's wrong.
Anyone want to tackle the mechanical gyroscope as a horizon indicator for flying around a curved surface problem?
Seems it's being avoided for some reason.....hmmmm?
Last edited:
Lol. kindergarten science tricks for the win!The magic gravity saves the day!
Not....
Gas pressure wins every time....
The external higher atmospheric pressure air is trying to get to (i.e equalize with) the tiny bit of lower pressure air inside the glass above the water when it is turned upside down. ....and if the seal is broken the air rushes upward to the low pressure area above the water....pushing the water out of the way....before it starts to leak out.
Simple demonstrable proof that air pressure wins over any "gravity"....every time....
You assertion is false Afoaf.
Atdabeach....I think your suggestion that we should be able to measure higher pressure on the bottom wall / floor of the container vs the sides...if gravity does indeed hold earth's atmosphere from equalizing with the vacuum of space....is a good one. Good luck with that indeed.
Unless the claim is demonstrated by experiment....it's wrong.
Anyone want to tackle the mechanical gyroscope as a horizon indicator for flying around a curved surface problem?
Seems it's being avoided for some reason.....hmmmm?
Redirect Notice
www.google.com
All gasses follow the same rules. There is no downward bias. The only difference is the rate and this is based on mass. You are missing key points and getting caught up on basically nothing. Graham's law states that the rate of diffusion or of effusion of a gas is inversely proportional to the square root of its molecular weight. There we go again with those pesky unbreakable laws of nature that render heliocentrism invalid.
Whether gas moves form one container to another is not important as the gas acts the same way in what ever container it resides in. No container... no gas pressure, as has been explained.
Exactly, we cannot measure something that does not exist.
Primarily, their relative density to the medium that they reside within.
And as Bohter showed above, pressure plays a definite role. I love this one:
It’s weird which laws of physics you embrace and those you don’t.
But why would rain fall in the direction it’s falling if not for gravity? Doesn’t your whole stance suggest rain should fall randomly in every direction rather than down?
@Stu: I have no problem continuing answering questions that not only have been answered, but are also easily googled... but you need to at least concede that there is no downward bias and that no container dictates that there can be no gas pressure, fair? I mean at the end of day, we are actually sitting here talking about supposed space ships flying to supposed CGI planets in supposed infinite vacuum space.
Primarily because of their relative density to the medium that they reside within. And again, why do air bubbles RISE in water? Why can David Blaine do this:
Relative density is is real. Archimedes had this sh!t over 2000 years ago!
OK, which physical laws do I not embrace?
As explained to @enframed in the post just above:
Primarily because of their relative density to the medium that they reside within. And again, why do air bubbles RISE in water? Why can David Blaine do this:
Relative density is is real. Archimedes had this sh!t over 2000 years ago!
No... not even on shrooms.
Yeah, weird, right?
Does your family know you believe there is a widespread conspiracy to hide the fact the world is flat?
Why do you think there is this conspiracy?
This is the question you need to answer.
But you won't.
what’s another name for relative density? Specific Gravity? Hmm, weird.
air bubbles don’t rise in water in zero gravity.
helium balloons don’t rise in zero gravity. They rise in earth’s atmosphere because of buoyancy.
Where are these zero gravity experiments being performed and do you have a link that shows 'em?
And I thought the discussion was about how our atmosphere would dissipate into the endless vacuum of space per one of the most basic laws of physics....overpowering any gravity force every time...and now you're taking about zero gravity....implying what again?
Here....I'll deflect you to a much more concrete black/white concept....
What ya got on the explanation for how a mechanical gyroscope horizon indicator works for flying around a ball?
If you used it solely to maintain a constant altitude you'd actually gain altitude.....really quickly, 6667 feet every 100 miles....right?
But that does not happen...
And if you're flying anywhere on a long haul....the ground/sky reference would invert at a rate of 1 degree every 70 miles....right?
But that does not happen.
And...if you think these devices constantly correct for the direction of down due to "gravity".....well....go watch that Navy training film again.....and then realize it would also correct itself in a turn....rendering it useless for level flight....right?
But that does not happen....
So they're the perfect device for flying over a flat surface....
Right?
Last edited:
Broken record bro....
Every time.
Although I would like to have the answer to this question....as would atdabeach, I'm sure....
It's not our question to answer simply because we're not the ones doing the deceiving.
Maybe go ask the folks at the top of the pyramid....
