>>40513641
Flat earthers can show indisputable proof of the firmament (containment) via the fact that earth’s electric field requires a 2nd Gaussian surface.
You have no proof of the vacuum of space, only appeals to authority, which you;ve already admitted with your concession that you have no demonstrable examples to support your assertions of gravity's effect on gas pressure.

I can show with scientific experimentation that electrostatics, density and buoyancy are responsible for the downward bias. You claim that space and time are bending and warping to cause things to go down but that you admittedly can’t actually prove it and you also admit that your predictions of how gravity works are 97% incorrect but you still believe it anyways.

Once again, flat earthers can actually substantiate our claims. Globe zealots admittedly cannot.

>no, I'm not interested in electrodynamics, personally.
I’ll take that as a concession as well.

>BTW if you cared you would ask a PhD.
I have. PhD physicists come onto aether cosmology discord and debate this topic regularly. Here’s an example of a PhD CERN physicist debating this exact topic. I’ll let you be the judge of how well he fared against the same questions I’ve asked you:

#FEF Ep.79 Gaussian Surfaces Part I. @WitsitGetsIt vs PhD CERN Physicist:
https://youtu.be/iXTsXkUAyJU

>The container size
you already admitted you can't substantiate your claim that gravity will prevent gas from seeking equilibrium with a vacuum so the container sized is irrelevant? your empirically baseless religious beliefs hold no weight.

>If you decreased the temperature
Another non sequitur. We’ve been over this already. There is more heat in the upper layers of the atmos. More heat = more kinetic energy.

>gravity would pull it together.
You’ve already conceded that you can’t provide proof of gravity pulling gas molecules together, and that it’s just a religious belief you hold.