Put a flat earthier into space

[TheDataGuy]

@Nukehasslefan If you are reading a book that is lay down horizontally and someone says the next line up do you raise your finger off the page?

Also, I answered your questions so can you at least answer mine whether molecules know which way is up and down?

 

[Nukehasslefan]

Your problem with this is your logical analysis and critical thinking around the results. You observe one thing and then make a whole load of conclusions without basis.

In your opinion based on words on a screen.

Friction between certain materials creates heat

Yes.

, that heat builds up and can cause fire (if one of the materials is combustible)

Yes.

, fire gives off heat and light.

Yes.

Your experiment proves this is true and that is about all.

Yes. Why would you need anything else. It's a primitive analogy, that's it.

It does not prove that friction=sound=heat=light.

It actually does, 100%.

That is a whole load of massive assumption.

It's a whole load of massive reality as far as I'm concerned.

That childlike level of thinking has a name in logical analysis.

Yep, It's called simple layperson logic.

I can't remember what it is called or find any of the well known examples (can anyone remind me?), but I did find this from Mark Haddon, which is a quite nice example:


In this example, the economist made one observation and jumped to a massive conclusion. It may or may not be correct.

Anyone can jump to a conclusion.
The issue is in showing it.
You can do any of the stuff I offer, as can any able person.

In your example, even the observations in the single experiment are flawed.

Not at all.

Friction gives heat and sound, but no light until it catches fire.

You do not get heat without light.
This is where our senses are utter primitive.
You think light has to be a shining light to your eyes. It doesn't.

But at the point it does catch fire, you stop frantically rubbing your rod.

Nice one. I'm crying with laughing here.

So friction stops, the sound stops, but now light and heat come out.

No.
Friction does not stop at all. Not for the material the energy was placed into. The light and heat is still friction. It does not stop at all.
Just like friction welding does not stop after energy is ceased, because that energy is still expanding and contracting in the metal and atmosphere.

The actual reason is heat can cause the ignition of combustible material and the heat generated by friction supplies this to start the fire. Burning the material then maintains the heat to keep the process going. Friction is out the loop at this point.

Friction is still well into the loop.
Heat in any form is friction, whether it's so low you can't feel it or so high it glows. Vibrations and frequencies and pressures.

The correct approach is saying "I have observed that friction in in these circumstances causes fire, and I believe that heat, light and sound MAY be the same thing, can I now go on and prove that?"

Already proved in just that.
We can still go on and it still comes to the exact same thing.

There are a number of approaches you can then take. Can you generate light without heat

No.

, can you generate light without sound

No.

, can you generate sound without friction?

No.

Or beyond the generation, can you block heat, light or sound and allow the others to continue.

Other what?

If not block then can you reduce one while not observing any change.

Reducing heat is not ceasing heat. Reducing light is not ceasing heat nor light. Reducing vibration/friction is not ceasing either.

If you can then it is a pretty big hint. For example a window does this.

A window does what?

You have been given countless examples of these in the past but your issue is that you reached a conclusion by thinking of someone rubbing sticks together, now will not be deterred from it and will swear blind that friction is behind it all, reinventing any related science without any basis to support your mindset, rather than stepping back (like a scientist would) and asking "did I reach the right conclusion there?".

The simplest things always show the reality.
A person can never decipher the complicated without being shown what engineered it.

Chemical reactions cause heat

Friction.

, you say friction at a molecular level.

Yep.

You can't prove this and no chemistry text has ever reported this as friction they all give very different reasons.

It's easy to see.

Why would this be?

They call it a chemical reaction. Do you know what a reaction is?

Fire, especially burning of chemical vapour.

Is friction.

You claim friction in the vapour free floating in air.

Nope. It's far from free floating. It's actually under intense expansion against dense mass of atmosphere. Basically intense friction.

No evidence of this and actually highly unlikely. Nuclear fission or fusion, you claim friction, nuclear physicists say otherwise.

I don't believe in it.

You need to look for conclusive proof and follow through experiments, apply logic and critical thinking.

Yep, I do. It does not suit people like yourself and I'm more than happy with that.

What you do is reach a conclusion without basis then refuse to accept anything that counters this, then scream that others are not following logic and critical thinking, everyone else is wrong, it is down to a brainwashing conspiracy. This is not rational.

Feel free to do what you wish. No screaming here. I do see the opposite though...but....well, we won't argue that.

 

[BigPete]

In your opinion based on words on a screen.

Yes.

Yes.

Yes.

Yes. Why would you need anything else. It's a primitive analogy, that's it.

It actually does, 100%.

It's a whole load of massive reality as far as I'm concerned.

Yep, It's called simple layperson logic.

Anyone can jump to a conclusion.
The issue is in showing it.
You can do any of the stuff I offer, as can any able person.

Not at all.

You do not get heat without light.
This is where our senses are utter primitive.
You think light has to be a shining light to your eyes. It doesn't.

Nice one. I'm crying with laughing here.

No.
Friction does not stop at all. Not for the material the energy was placed into. The light and heat is still friction. It does not stop at all.
Just like friction welding does not stop after energy is ceased, because that energy is still expanding and contracting in the metal and atmosphere.


Friction is still well into the loop.
Heat in any form is friction, whether it's so low you can't feel it or so high it glows. Vibrations and frequencies and pressures.

Already proved in just that.
We can still go on and it still comes to the exact same thing.

No.

No.

No.

Other what?

Reducing heat is not ceasing heat. Reducing light is not ceasing heat nor light. Reducing vibration/friction is not ceasing either.

A window does what?


The simplest things always show the reality.
A person can never decipher the complicated without being shown what engineered it.

Friction.

Yep.

It's easy to see.

They call it a chemical reaction. Do you know what a reaction is?

Is friction.

Nope. It's far from free floating. It's actually under intense expansion against dense mass of atmosphere. Basically intense friction.

I don't believe in it.

Yep, I do. It does not suit people like yourself and I'm more than happy with that.

Feel free to do what you wish. No screaming here. I do see the opposite though...but....well, we won't argue that.

Logon or register to see this image

 

[Nukehasslefan]

So molecules know this? You still haven't answered the simple question of how molecules know this.

They don't know anything other than to resist whatever is above by using whatever is below as leverage.

 

[TheDataGuy]

They don't know anything other than to resist whatever is above by using whatever is below as leverage.

So how do they know what is above?

 

[Nukehasslefan]

So how do they know what is above?

The pressure.

 

[TheDataGuy]

The pressure.

So the particles above push down, so they know which way is down?

 

[Nukehasslefan]

So the particles above push down, so they know which way is down?

The particles push down and up and each do so against a little bit less pressure above than below under their own energy.

 

[TheDataGuy]

The particles push down and up and each do so against a little bit less pressure above than below under their own energy.

So they do know which way is up and down then?

 

[Nukehasslefan]

So they do know which way is up and down then?

It's a natural stacking. If you want to put that down to molecules knowing then go with that if it makes it easier for you to understand.

 

[What A Waster]

Natural stacking

Always the same way, creating a weird gravity like effect.
Despite all the things in the world like vehicles, cities, people, wind, these molecules naturally stack that way but when @DaveH was in a pressure sealed room his breathing caused Atmospheric Chaos.

Shambles.

 

[TheDataGuy]

It's a natural stacking. If you want to put that down to molecules knowing then go with that if it makes it easier for you to understand.

But why do they not stack side to side? They either know which way is up or there is some other force making it stack.

Again a paper analogy, If I have 2 pieces of paper and I stack them like this = the top pushes the bottom, correct. If I now turn them so they are stood up, turning left so they look like this || then as we have determined they have no knowledge of direction they will travel to the right ||->

 

[DaveH]

In your opinion based on words on a screen.

Yes.

Yes.

Yes.

Yes. Why would you need anything else. It's a primitive analogy, that's it.

It actually does, 100%.

It's a whole load of massive reality as far as I'm concerned.

Yep, It's called simple layperson logic.

Anyone can jump to a conclusion.
The issue is in showing it.
You can do any of the stuff I offer, as can any able person.

Not at all.

You do not get heat without light.
This is where our senses are utter primitive.
You think light has to be a shining light to your eyes. It doesn't.

Nice one. I'm crying with laughing here.

No.
Friction does not stop at all. Not for the material the energy was placed into. The light and heat is still friction. It does not stop at all.
Just like friction welding does not stop after energy is ceased, because that energy is still expanding and contracting in the metal and atmosphere.


Friction is still well into the loop.
Heat in any form is friction, whether it's so low you can't feel it or so high it glows. Vibrations and frequencies and pressures.

Already proved in just that.
We can still go on and it still comes to the exact same thing.

No.

No.

No.

Other what?

Reducing heat is not ceasing heat. Reducing light is not ceasing heat nor light. Reducing vibration/friction is not ceasing either.

A window does what?


The simplest things always show the reality.
A person can never decipher the complicated without being shown what engineered it.

Friction.

Yep.

It's easy to see.

They call it a chemical reaction. Do you know what a reaction is?

Is friction.

Nope. It's far from free floating. It's actually under intense expansion against dense mass of atmosphere. Basically intense friction.

I don't believe in it.

Yep, I do. It does not suit people like yourself and I'm more than happy with that.

Feel free to do what you wish. No screaming here. I do see the opposite though...but....well, we won't argue that.

Thank you, you proved my point exactly. You stick to your guns on your viewpoint and make claims without any basis, because you jumped to an absurd conclusion.

A great example in amongst all that is "you do not get heat without light". There are loads of examples. I'm drinking a cup of tea at the moment, no light. I'm sitting next to a warm radiator, no light. My laptop is running a bit hot, no light from the CPU. Then as I said there are chemical reactions which produce heat and no light. But the other thing you can do is rest your hand on your forehead, it feels warm. As endothermic beings, we generate heat without light.

The other thing to pick up on, windows block a lot of sound, but very little light.

Then there is what I posted yesterday and you waved away. You can block light with two polarisation filters, but not block sound.

It is so trivial to provide counters to your theory, it shows why you have to open your mind and no stick religiously to your first conclusion.

Natural stacking

Always the same way, creating a weird gravity like effect.
Despite all the things in the world like vehicles, cities, people, wind, these molecules naturally stack that way but when @DaveH was in a pressure sealed room his breathing caused Atmospheric Chaos.

Shambles.

My room didn't work because it was not perfectly square and had other objects in it. Also the sensors tell lies.

It it was something like a sealed gas cylinder then that would have been valid.

And as we all know, if you drop a ball bearing in a sealed gas cylinder and pressure it up to equal pressure, the ball bearing will not always fall to the bottom and you would never hear it rattling. It will just float inside it. This does happen right?

 

[TheDataGuy]

Then there is what I posted yesterday and you waved away. You can block light with two polarisation filters, but not block sound.

You can actually prove that with sun glasses. If you have polaroid glasses and an android phone with an LCD screen (It worked with my pixel 3A and Fairphone 3+), if you tilt the phone you can't see the light from the screen. Here is a video showing some examples

 

[Nukehasslefan]

But why do they not stack side to side? They either know which way is up or there is some other force making it stack.

Think of a pyramid of molecules.
Most?
Least?
Most pressure?
Least pressure?

Again a paper analogy, If I have 2 pieces of paper and I stack them like this = the top pushes the bottom, correct.

The bottom pushes the top and the top pushes the bottom of what's above and uses the one below as resistance to push.

If I now turn them so they are stood up, turning left so they look like this || then as we have determined they have no knowledge of direction they will travel to the right ||->

They will be pushed to the right or left by what's next to them and above that causes them to resist that push, as above answer.
Have a bit of time to think on it.

Remember the pyramid system. I'd use a dome but a pyramid system gives a better analogy.

 

[TheDataGuy]

Think of a pyramid of molecules.
Most?
Least?
Most pressure?
Least pressure?


The bottom pushes the top and the top pushes the bottom of what's above and uses the one below as resistance to push.

They will be pushed to the right or left by what's next to them and above that causes them to resist that push, as above answer.
Have a bit of time to think on it.

Remember the pyramid system. I'd use a dome but a pyramid system gives a better analogy.

So if we go in a tunnel underground we will be under less pressure as the ground above is shielding us from the pressure of the atmosphere above?

If the wind is disrupting these layers why don't we experience different levels of force all over the place?

At higher altitudes we must fall slower then?

 

[What A Waster]

Think of a pyramid of molecules.
Most?
Least?
Most pressure?
Least pressure?


The bottom pushes the top and the top pushes the bottom of what's above and uses the one below as resistance to push.

They will be pushed to the right or left by what's next to them and above that causes them to resist that push, as above answer.
Have a bit of time to think on it.

Remember the pyramid system. I'd use a dome but a pyramid system gives a better analogy.

Sphinx on it.

 

[TheDataGuy]

They will be pushed to the right or left by what's next to them and above that causes them to resist that push, as above answer.
Have a bit of time to think on it.

So the paper will travel to the right, try this at home, what happens?

Think of a pyramid of molecules.
Most?
Least?
Most pressure?
Least pressure?


The bottom pushes the top and the top pushes the bottom of what's above and uses the one below as resistance to push.

They will be pushed to the right or left by what's next to them and above that causes them to resist that push, as above answer.
Have a bit of time to think on it.

Remember the pyramid system. I'd use a dome but a pyramid system gives a better analogy.

If I have a sealed container with atmosphere inside and I shake it around, how do the layers stack up again?

 

[What A Waster]

So if we go in a tunnel underground we will be under less pressure as the ground above is shielding us from the pressure of the atmosphere above?

If the wind is disrupting these layers why don't we experience different levels of force all over the place?

At higher altitudes we must fall slower then?

If go down a well and stand on some scales you weigh more because there is more stacked atmosphere pushing you down

 

[Nukehasslefan]

Thank you, you proved my point exactly. You stick to your guns on your viewpoint and make claims without any basis, because you jumped to an absurd conclusion.

Far from absurd.

A great example in amongst all that is "you do not get heat without light".

You don't.

There are loads of examples. I'm drinking a cup of tea at the moment, no light.

Really. Go and get an infra red viewer and get back to me.
Like I said our eyes are primitive.

I'm sitting next to a warm radiator, no light.

As above.

My laptop is running a bit hot, no light from the CPU.

Same as above.

Then as I said there are chemical reactions which produce heat and no light.

But they do. You just don't see it.

But the other thing you can do is rest your hand on your forehead, it feels warm. As endothermic beings, we generate heat without light.

As above.

The other thing to pick up on, windows block a lot of sound, but very little light.

A lot is not zero.

Then there is what I posted yesterday and you waved away. You can block light with two polarisation filters, but not block sound.

If you block then you block and see nothing. It negates the entire thing in itself.

It is so trivial to provide counters to your theory, it shows why you have to open your mind and no stick religiously to your first conclusion.

You haven't provided counters.

My room didn't work because it was not perfectly square and had other objects in it. Also the sensors tell lies.

Sensors are fine but they're not offering you what you're arguing for.

It it was something like a sealed gas cylinder then that would have been valid.

A sealed gas cylinder proves what?

And as we all know, if you drop a ball bearing in a sealed gas cylinder and pressure it up to equal pressure, the ball bearing will not always fall to the bottom and you would never hear it rattling. It will just float inside it. This does happen right?

Why would it happen?