Atmosphere

When one is reviewing as many of the fundamental ideas that shape ones thinking with regard to the models of where we are, the model that we have a breathable atmosphere held in place by gravity around the globe earth surrounded by an infinite near perfect vacuum should be on the VERY TOP of this list.  Strangely, like others, I have only just turned my mind to this phenomenon.

One is not surprised to find that the information about the thickness of the atmosphere surrounding the Earth is totally muddled. Here are two examples, the first which says the atmosphere is 300 miles thick, but most of it is within 10 miles, while the other tells us that it is 60 miles thick. http://www.space.com/17683-earth-atmosphere.html https://www.grc.nasa.gov/www/k-12/airplane/atmosphere.html

Although one hasn’t actually seen any “peer reviewed” papers on how the atmosphere stays, here is an example of what passes for an explanation of the standard model of a globe which has an atmosphere held by gravity”  http://earthsky.org/earth/what-keeps-earths-atmosphere-on-earth

The evidence which unambiguously and emphatically disproves this model is obtained simply by the placement of a glass of water inside a vacuum chamber, with a couple of examples provided below:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=739990nm0QY

The items to be noted in reviewing these demonstrations include:

  1. That compulsion we call Gravity is acting on all of the matter inside these vacuum jars just as it is allegedly acting upon the putative outer edges of the atmosphere and the infinite vacuum of space

  2. Before the water evaporates, the air inside the chamber is withdrawn very easily by the application of very small vacuum pressure differentials.

  3. Not only does the vacuum draw out the air, it evaporates the water. If applied for sufficiently long periods, all of the water will be evaporated.

Remember here, the air pressure outside the bell shaped vacuum chamber is irrelevant to this experiment. The environment of concern is entirely within the chamber where gravity exists and a vacuum is created. What do we observe? We observe that GRAVITY is UNABLE to prevent the air from leaving the chamber. Not only that, GRAVITY is UNABLE to prevent the WATER from leaving the chamber as vacuum is applied.

Consider a sturdy airtight steel pipeline that is built from close to sea level beside a road leading to the top of a mountain at 10,000 ft (say).  The air pressure at sea level is 101 kPa, while the air pressure at the top is about 70 kPa.  We now seal the top and bottom of the pipeline, and the pressures remain unchanged.  Next, we apply a vacuum pump at the top of the pipeline… what do we then observe?  We observe that air pressure at the top of the pipe falls from 70 kPa towards zero.  We also observe that the air pressure at sea level also falls… and it falls TOWARDS ZERO as well.  In other words, the force of gravity is NOT able to prevent the gas at the bottom of the pipeline from being drawn from the pipeline at the top.   Despite this well documented and understood phenomenon, we are expected to believe that the Earths atmosphere can coexist with the “near perfect vacuum of space”.

The argument that I have outlined above is unlikely to be disputed by any engineer or anyone familiar with the operation of vacuum systems.

With the above in mind, we can now compare the vacuum pump connected to the pipeline at the top of the mountain to the infinite and “near perfect” vacuum of “space”. As our discussion above has unambiguously demonstrated, the gas at the edge of the atmosphere is going to attempt to fill the void of space with Boltzmannesque determination. Once these molecules have vacated the scene, those immediately below it will then become exposed to the “Vacuum of Space” and they will also decamp into the void. This process will continue until all of the atmosphere and the oceans and the people and, dare one say, some otherwise very solid chunks of solid would also vaporise.

Therefore, the model that we live on a globe with an atmosphere open to the infinite vacuum of space is disproved.

The ramifications of this discussion are profound.  Modern cosmology demands that planets travel around suns around galaxies and clusters without friction… and this requires a “near perfect” vacuum between the masses.   Without the fiction that Earths atmosphere can coexist with a infinite vacuum without any physical barrier, the entire Copernican model implodes…

8 thoughts on “Atmosphere”

  1. Michael D Boll

    Thanks for the article. I heard what I believe is another solid argument yesterday on Flat Earth Brothers’ YouTube channel. NASA says the earth is moving hundreds of thousands of miles per hour through space in all different directions. So if Apollo headed to the moon at 25,000 mph, the second they entered the vacuum of space from Earth’s “gravity-attached atmospere”, it would have been left in the dust by the earth and moon. Because the latter two are supposedly flying through space at much greater speed than Apollo could muster.

    Any thoughts?

    Like

    Reply ↓
    1. anounceofsaltperday Post author

      Thank you for your interest Michael. The movement of the earth is a whole new question which really requires that I publish another page on that topic. The gyroscopic instruments used in small aircraft for both direction and level flight can only operate on the assumption that the earth is both flat and UNMOVING. This is because the principle of a gyroscope is that once it is set into a high spin it will maintain its axis of rotation in 3D space. The wild gyrations which are said to exist in planetary motion are simply NOT detected by the gyroscopes of light aircraft. If such movements were taking place, then gyroscopic direction and level indication would not be possible. The idea that travel between the earth and moon would not be possible because the rocket does not move fast enough is, I suggest, difficult to support. Since a rocket is already in motion with the earth, its motion on “take off” would be superposed (a more or less identical meaning to superIMposed) onto the motion of the earth. In my experience, the “Principle of Superposition” is completely valid. However, NAVIGATING the travel between the earth and the moon while these bodies are supposedly spiralling behind an impossibly large gyrating sun certainly exceeds modern computational capability. The proof of this statement lies in the reality that predictions of eclipses CANNOT be made on the basis of the alleged movements of the various heavenly bodies. Predictions of eclipses are made on the basis of the METONIC CYCLE… and these calculations have been performed for most of recorded history.

      Like

      Reply ↓
      1. Michael D Boll

        Thanks for your reply. The superposed concept makes sense, but what about the conservation of angular momentum? Wouldn’t that also come into play? I think Apollo would leave the spinning “velcroed” atmosphere of earth and carry that spin with it into space… with no way to correct it since rockets don’t work in a vacuum. Anyway, I agree that the calculations to hit the moon in this spinning, wobbling, shooting through space situation would be next to impossible even with the best computers.

        I also agree that gyros are one of the best, most irrefutable pieces of evidence that the earth is not a sphere.

        I will look into your metonic cycle point, as I hadn’t heard of it before.

        Thanks again.

        Like

      2. anounceofsaltperday Post author

        When the rocket left Cape Canaveral, the putative spin of the earth would be sending the rocket around 20 degrees differently to the putative plane of rotation of the moon around the earth. This velocity vector of 1,500 km/hr would have to have been compensated for during the flight. I have just had a brief scan of how the Saturn V rockets were actually steered…. it is just a wall of completely unhelpful commentary by defenders of the faith. The computational power on board the Apollo missions was no better than a HP25 scientific calculator of 1975… so my level of scepticism that the complex navigation and steering required is well beyond the capabilities of the time.

        Like

  3. Emelia Wappel

    Thanks for the helpful write-up. It is also my opinion that mesothelioma has an very long latency period of time, which means that signs and symptoms of the disease would possibly not emerge until 30 to 50 years after the original exposure to asbestos fiber. Pleural mesothelioma, that is certainly the most common type and impacts the area round the lungs, could cause shortness of breath, chest muscles pains, plus a persistent cough, which may bring about coughing up bloodstream.

    Like

    Reply ↓

Leave a comment