/sci/ - Science & Math

>>15157048
>ANY ONE WHO DOESN'T BELIEVE WHAT WIKIPEDIA AND THE CHURCH OF SCIENTISM TELL THEM TO BELIEVE MUST BE A SHILL!!!!
youre too far indoctrinated to think for yourself so its unfathomable to you that anyone could disagree with the narrative that Jewtube and Google algo's tells them to believe. FE is heavily censored. its literally the exact opposite of glowie behavior to want to discuss it.

>gas molecules go all the way past the ISS, hence why we have to orbital correction thrusters on all capsules, satellites, and stations.
>for every particle at the surface that wants out, there are gas particles on the edge of space that are being pulled back in.
>t. proceeds to regurgitate the unsubstantiated religious dogma he was indoctrinated with as if its proof of anything other than his failure to understand what a begging the question fallacy is

the parabox empirically proves that there are no gas particles on the edge of your fictional and gay "space" that are being pulled back in. as stated multiple times itt already:

gravity is STRONGEST near the surface and gets WEAKER as you increase altitude. if the gravity is too weak to prevent gas from moving into a relatively weak vacuum near the surface where gravity is supposedly STRONGEST, it certainly wouldn’t be capable of preventing gas from moving into the much stronger vacuum of space at higher altitudes where gravity is WEAKER.
you should be able to provide a specific altitude where you could perform the “pressurized box in a vacuum chamber” experiment where you think the pressurized air WOULD NOT seek equilibrium with the vacuum chamber. If you cannot specify an altitude in which this would happen, then why do you even believe such a place exists?

see picrel here: >>15156818 and tell me what you don’t understand about it. Be specific, don’t try to squirm around and make claims you can’t empirically substantiate. Look at that picrel and tell me EXACTLY what is wrong with it…