/sci/ - Science & Math

>>15159823
>It's trivial physics
no its not at all. its unsubstantiated religious dogma that is contradicted by physics.

>muh temp argument for the umpteenth time itt
picrel. temp doesnt help you in the slightest. upper atmos is hottest

>Gravity prevents it from escaping when the motive force reaches zero at the fluctuating altittude
begging the question fallacy.
>The gravity from earth attracts molecules and the compact the ones beneath them
yet another begging the question fallacy.

>It won't.
objectively, if you built a container of ANY SIZE and sealed it, it could be made to have the EXACT same gradient we have on earth (since the container is ON EARTH lol)

> Once it is equalized there is no longer a motive force
yes there is. the gas pressure BELOW the layer that was just replaced with a a 10^-17 TORR vacuum would move up to fill that same space see: >>15159594

>Everything below the TOP LAYER will remain in place.
you cannot substantiate this and its contradictory to all empirical evidence and the known laws of physics.

> If the pressure on top of a molecule is the same as the pressure below it, does it move? NOPE!
the pressure below the loose molecules at the very top is greater than that of the vacuum and so, as per the 2nd Law of thermodynamics, would equalize.

this kills your model. If the best argument you have is just a remedial begging the question fallacy, now that this has been pointed out to you, you should have some integrity and admit you dont have an answer.