Predictions: at best some incoherent rant that they can but won't do it for some bullshit reason
You're viewing a single comment thread. View all comments, or full comment thread.
Comments (87)
sorted by:
Then what you have written is not the law. Thank you for admitting as much. If we want to discuss the property of gasses, let's speak on the explicit laws of behavior. Not just your own words.
So the ceiling itself of the container holding our air in is exerting pressure on the gasses in our atmosphere?
There was another law you had summarized earlier:
It's the basic idea of kinetic molecular theory, that gas molecules are in a constant state of rapid motion to fill the container that they are in. Doesn't the idea that in a container the gas has a lower pressure at the top of the container go against this?
https://www.westfield.ma.edu/personalpages/cmasi/gen_chem1/Gases/KMT/kmt.htm
Then you should have no trouble finding/obtaining measurement which contradicts it. Yet you can't... Why do you think that is? Could it possibly be because it IS a law, and you are wrong?
That is certainly one way to conceptualize it. Another - equally valid - is that the pressure is from the gas itself, and the ceiling (all walls of the container, actually) prevents that pressure from dissipating to nothing.
That is a fine conceptual framework, but there are others too! Because such motion is averaged over the entire gas volume, you most often don't need to consider it all. Gas largely behaves as a fluid, and fluid laws most often apply. In any case, nothing ever completely stops moving (no matter the state/phase of the matter), unless all thermal energy is gone...
No, because the number of gas molecules (in the same given area) at the top of the container is lesser. Thus lesser collisions, thus lesser pressure. As i said, it is a perfectly sound conceptual framework. It's just not necessarily correct! Being useful isn't the same as being correct, and this is most often misunderstood.