Theredbarron

4 minutes ago, Strange said:

No, that's not what I said. You seem to think that "30" is a vacuum, presumably because it is the last number on your gauge.

There are three problems with your constant references to "30"

1. A pressure of 30 would be more than a perfect vacuum; it would be a negative pressure. (Which is obviously impossible).

2) You are not measuring the pressure of your vacuum, you are measuring how far below air pressure it is. Air pressure varies. It is like saying that you are building a wall and you want it 4 feet below head height. But that depends on the person (everyone's head height is different) and even the time of day (we get shorter throughout the day).

3) It is not accurate enough. I have no idea what your meter is like, but presumably it is similar to the image posted by Sensei on the first page of this thread. That has divisions of 0.5 in Hg. So the lowest pressure it can measure is 29.5 in Hg. That is many thousands of times larger than the pressure you need to achieve. A "perfect vacuum" would be somewhere between the 29.5 and 30 marks. It is like trying measure the thickness of a human hair by comparing it with a brick.

When people create good quality vacuum (or measure the vacuum of space) then they measure how much greater than zero the pressure is. And they measure it in the right units. 

Not completely absent of matter.

The space between galaxies is the emptiest, with roughly 10 atoms per cubic metre. 

The space between stars (inside our galaxy) there may be 1,000 times more than that.

And the space between planets there will be roughly 1,000 times more again.

For comparison, a high quality laboratory vacuum (which would be impossible for you to achieve) will have something 10 quadrillion (10¹⁶)  molecules per cubic meter.

So even a really good vacuum does not approach that of deep space.

If you described what your "chamber" is (it was a "jar" earlier) then maybe people would be able to help.

Also, if you are not using the right sort of equipment, it could be dangerous. If you are causing this sort of accident, I don't think we should give you any advice other than: stop until you have the right equipment (including a safety cage around the vacuum chamber).

Not relevant. 

Useful context would be what type of meter you are using. Why you are not using the right sort of meter. What your vacuum chamber/jar is made of. How large it is. Why you can't just put a barrier between the "spinning thing" and the paper, smoke, whatever.

 

 

holy crap!

where is the end then? look I have always been the end but maybe where is the end of vacuum?

where is the end if we cant get there?

35 minutes ago, MigL said:

Well, if you have a so-so vacuum, where you still have enough gas present, to create some pressure when heated, you have a Crookes radiometer, and the vanes spin away from the dark side ( gas pressure driven ).
If you have a really good vacuum ( and very low friction set-up ), you have a Nichols radiometer, and the vanes spin away from the light side ( light momentum driven ).

I  can't really give you values for the vacuum at which the 'switch' occurs as there would be a 'few' variables involved.
( thanks Strange, for supplying the name of the Nichols radiometer )

what switch? and tell me the varialbles? I will do my best on making in happen! 

I will apply everything learn from this site and I have! 

On 5/24/2020 at 1:13 PM, Phi for All said:

!

Moderator Note

You behave like an idiot. You see persecution in rigor. You cherry-pick what makes sense to you. You don't do science. So pretty soon, I imagine you'll break enough rules and we won't have to respond to your ungrateful crap. Have a great day!

 

So is this site for only mainstream science or are people allowed to get answers to questions that are relevant to what they are doing even if you dont believe in what they are doing? not trying to argue just you have only been negative! What is it that you have accomplished that you want me to respect? I would be its just not showing me on here and I cant find it!

On 5/23/2020 at 4:50 PM, swansont said:

OK, there’s a pump. That’s a detail not originally included. You’re moving matter around. Gas is matter, so knowing details is important.

If it’s full of smoke that might be a problem, since particulates might be clogging the pump and/or gauge.

look I have come off as a dick! I know you have a 

phd! So you can understand that sometimes it takes someone to observe something to learn it. You definitely have what 30 inches hg means to you! im not talking about the actual measurement but the actual effects on our existence in every situation. Not every but most likely. It shows that water evaporates at a huge amount but only 1 inch for example or am I reading things wrong?

the last line is but only by one inch is what I understand in that area of pressure 29 inch to 30 inch is 1 inch but why doe that one inch have so much effect or is it the effort?

I tell you what I dont want a prize or reward, If I get a prize I will not accept! I will give it away. I dont care about being the first person to do something. I think a whole lot further then just what im doing! if I move too fast just answer what you can! im not going to hold it against you. I want to learn as much as possible! The way I learn is not the same as you!. I apply everything I learn and TEST it! I may not be able to tell you here on this site that I appreciate you but I have learned more from this site then everything else! I put myself in speculations because it is all speculation using physics that is understood to test. I want whats in your brain faster then what you think people can learn! state the obvious first!

so phil is not here?

13 hours ago, Strange said:

Lets make this more explicit. Standard atmospheric pressure is 760 mm Hg (obviously, actual atmospheric pressure varies a lot around that). 

760 mm Hg is 29.9213 in Hg.

So the lowest pressure you could possibly achieve, on your gauge, from standard atmospheric pressure is 29.9213. But as your gauge is showing relative pressure (presumably, this is another bit of missing context) then the actual lowest pressure you could possibly achieve depends on your local air pressure at the time.

This is why you need to move to an absolute pressure gauge, showing the pressure in sensible units (e.g. torr or pascals).

 

By the way, you have asked a few times what people mean by "context". It is the extra information needed to fully understand the question being asked.

https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/context

Hope that provides enough context to help you understand why people were asking for the context.

ok I get that. Thanks. So it doesn't really matter that I reach 30 because its not even close to space is what I have understood so far? So if that is the most attainable then how are things tested against the forces of space other then a calculator?

or better yet is there any place in space that has is absent of matter? probably a dumb question but it is relevant to how my crap works

and another thing is there a chemical based smoke that creates without it pushing the smoke? im using smoke bombs and it forces the smoke around the chamber and makes it hard to see the effects that im trying to observe. something that oozes smoke

I also apologize for not being nice! Since I have been coming here people haven't exactly been awesome. I do come off arrogant. Its more of a defense thing. I understand that some of you deal with people that do the same crap as me but you should expect it. Your an open website for people who think they are scientist. im probably one of the worst. if I need to bring up a different subject to show you that im not playing then I can but I dont have property rights yet. im broke and it takes years for stuff to happen for some reason. I am very over qualified for power systems and electrical energy even if it doesn't seem that way. I ask questions not just to hear the answer but to also check the source.

now my chamber has a leak. This is the 3rd chamber I have imploded. 

this idea that im working on is just the one I know I cant prove to you here! I like the challenge. The very first topic I posted on here I request the challenge on this. I still want that. Im not here to convince anyone. I dont want a prize. I love reverse engineering! its extremely fun!

right now for me its like 2 different coding languages having the same result

You can think im crazy or an idiot. It doesn't matter to me.  I thought I was too. Then all the doctors later its still stands. How about that for context?

I dont know if you remember me posting this but I have a mild brain injury! of course it effects my reading cognition to which im sure you can see maybe!

So I dont have social media like snapchat or face book. I have a gmail account. So when I come here and ask stupid questions usually its because there is little human contact let alone with people that understand anything! Example how to change a light bulb. I think most people dont know how to in America. I was going to say the world but intellectual evolution has effected areas I have not been or understood yet!

your on the internet! you dont know who your talking to at all times!

23 hours ago, MigL said:

Not to b a stickler...
But that is only accurate for partial pressures/vacuum.
Once you get to an appreciably good vacuum, heating ( on the dark side ) is no longer the driver, as there is no gas pressure due to heating.
It is radiation pressure on the silvered side ( if the spindle has low enough friction ) that forces the plates to act like solar sails would in space, and it will rotate in the opposite direction.

So this too, depends on what you are trying to accomplish, as the results would be opposite for differing vacuum.

I just read this!. This is exactly what I need. What is meant by different vacuum?

2 minutes ago, Sensei said:

BTW, are you familiar with Crookes radiometer.. ?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crookes_radiometer

It has wing placed in near vacuum with white side and black side.. after shining light on it, it starts moving...

isn't that because the one side of each blade gets hotter creating a slight pressure on that side spinning the deal when its in a near vacuum?

1 minute ago, swansont said:

Have you explained what you mean by this? 

Contrary to your stance on this, such detail matters, as telepathy is not real

see what I mean by I suck at at this! I littlerally have a problem with reading and comprehending it even my own questions sound great at first. 

ok the reason why vacuum is important to what im doing is because the wheel that im using generates vacuum or a lower pressure differential in one spot. dont know if that makes sense. it moves pockets in a manner that generates the lower pressure area. I used planets as the original understanding of how to create this wheel. I dont want to explain all that again because you wont get it is what I see. Its not telepathy. its a physical object and its actually extremely simple to understand but very hard to explain to any of you here. everyone else on the other hand. 

2 minutes ago, Strange said:

So, it seems there are now two ways to go.

You could ask the mods to close this thread because that original question has been answered. (And then, later start another one when you want to discuss some otherapsect of your idea.)

Or you could keep this thread to discuss some of the other useful information that has come up - what level of vacuum you need to achieve, techniques for getting there, etc.

Up to you.

But, can I just ask again what the purpose of the vacuum is: is it just to eliminate air movement as a possible cause of the movement, or do you expect you system to work differently / better in a vacuum?

 

you wanted context and see what happens. just because people dont understand or believe in something doesn't make it not happening. The vacuum is to attempt to get rid of air and see the effects if they still hold. I wanted to understand how important it is to get to 30. Where in space is comparable to 30 inches maybe? I got the other stuff which I am going to use but as an understanding from an observational point of view now with context I hope how important is it.  I kind of doubt some of you have any idea where im going with this and you dont need to. if I state what im doing then idiots like phil start in way out of context and say crap only to argue

I get that magnetism works in a vacuum but this is not magnetism and it only works on magnetic matter not all matter!

How about what is the lowest vacuum? Is it simply a space that is not occupied by any matter for the lowest or is it a state of density of matter or gasses that occupy the space? 

I even apologized for not being able to ask the question correctly PHil

he is going to shut it down because he cant read

8 minutes ago, Phi for All said:

!

Moderator Note

You behave like an idiot. You see persecution in rigor. You cherry-pick what makes sense to you. You don't do science. So pretty soon, I imagine you'll break enough rules and we won't have to respond to your ungrateful crap. Have a great day!

 

Why should I be grateful to you or some others here when all you do is talk crap like you know everything im doing? you cant move anything in a vacuum without contacting it with the force directly and you think you know what im doing. This is speculations correct

stop reading if you dont like it

2 minutes ago, Ghideon said:

 

Does that imply that you first create a vacuum and then add gas? Is the outcome you expect/predict that the added gas will not be equally distributed but instead cling to the rotating wheel?   If so you may think about placement of the gauge if you have a single, or if more than one gauge is required.

Sorry if I'm misinterpreting the experimental setup.

Yes vacuum first as if its in space is the idea but not whats happening. Just as a planet does is what im expecting but if the conditions are controlled then maybe I can get it to hold but not something im going for. So would I need a pretty good sized chamber so I can get some distance from the wheel and setup a couple gauges or so? I might weld one up and place a camera in lights in it is what I was thinking on that. I

7 minutes ago, Phi for All said:

!

Moderator Note

I hope you're beginning to see how important context and clarity are. If anyone here hopes to give you a decent reply, they obviously need more than what you gave in your OP. The evidence? Look how much better the replies got when you answered some questions. 

So can we please drop the whole "You dont even read the whole thing and then you speak" bullshit? Everyone replying is trying to HELP YOU do some science, and you seem most ungrateful.

 

my original question is how important is the difference between 29 and 30! someone answered it and some just tried to ask about my setup. I didnt originally ask how to get to 30. I was trying to see how important getting to 30 would be not that my setup can do it or not. The same people on here doing the same thing because they dont like someone. I clearly thanked the one  gave me good info! sorry that I dont quite understand what was meant by context which I also stated. are you being just like those few and not reading and just being biased? 

I dont have to respond to people just because you state something. Re read and then tell me I wasn't trying to get info

you dont read and then spit bullshit

2 minutes ago, Sensei said:

If you will have iron inside it, you can move it by magnet or electromagnet.

If you will have electrostatically charged pieces of something, you can move them using electrostatically charged things from outside.

I didnt say thats all I can move. Thats just what im telling you and what you have seen in the past. rubber metal glass all move with the same wheel grounded or not. wood is in there somewhere. it depends on the size of it  because its relevant to the strength of the wheel which is also dependant on size. Dont forget air is matter and what im doing it is relevant but may or may not be the primary bases of this function. Hence why im asking about the 30 inches. From my point of view it is only relevant when in that environment or atmospheric condition. So not just simply vacuum but all densities. 

oh yeah and water but its a little hard to do that in a vacuum. Good thing space doesn't have water

2 minutes ago, MigL said:

Gases/vapors do get trapped in solid materials, like glass or metal.
The 'off-gassing', or liberation of these trapped gases/vapors can take quite a while, as small amounts are liberated very slowly.
The first 95% of the pressure drop will occur rather quick, but that last little bit could take days.
One way to speed up the off-gassing is by raising the temperature high enough to drive out moisture and the like.

I started to wonder this. Just like in an ac system you have to hold the vac for an amount of time to get the moisture out. Makes sense

2 minutes ago, Strange said:

Ok. But you said that you were able to move the paper. I (maybe wrongly) assumed that you wanted to remove the air to test if the paper still moved. That implies some sort of force that makes the paper move. Different forces act in different ways, so I was just discussing a force that acts in a similar way to gravity because that is a very simple model.

If I am wrong, then I can see that my suggestion to insert a barrier instead of removing the air would not be relevant. (But the reason for removing the air is part of the context that would help answer your questions.)

To give you some more specific figures on the level of vacuum you would need to achieve if you want to reproduce the conditions in space:

• Low vacuum: 760 Torr to 1 x 10-3 Torr
  • Vacuum cleaner: to 600 Torr
  • Thermos bottle 10-3 Torr
• High vacuum: 10-3 to 10-9 Torr
  • Electron microscope
  • Ion Implanter – Evaporator – Sputterer
• Ultra high vacuum: 10-9 to 10-12 Torr
  • CERN LHC: 1 x 10-10 Torr
  • Moon’s surface: 1 x 10-11 Torr
  • Deep Space 1 x 10-17 Torr = 0.000,000,000,000,000,01 Torr

You are currently in that "low vacuum" range.

From: https://www.raclub.org/Documents/Programs/VACUUM.pdf (there is a lot of other useful information in there; looks like a pretty good tutorial)

I hope you will forgive me if I keep trying to help.🙂

I do have one question that you might be able to answer. Is there anything out there right now that can move a variety of matter in a vacuum without contact? The other issue with vacuum that im having is that the feature that I will install uses gasses to create its own atmosphere like conditions around the wheel in a vacuum. It will simply fill up the chamber so why even go for 30 in this case. Its more like I would have to actually take it into space which is sort of unlikely to test it. If I can get it to 30 without the feature is something im working on.

by get to I mean not only vacuum but moving something in it. 

its a mechanical replication of a planet of no specific one but the common features of them!

6 minutes ago, Strange said:

You are very unlikely to be able to recreate the same level of vacuum as space without some very sophisticated equipment. And a far more accurate pressure gauge.

If you want to achieve that level of vacuum, your set up is very relevant. 

If you have acheived -29 in Hg, then this is about 10¹² (one thousand billion) times higher pressure than the surface of the moon. Which is, in turn, about 1,000 time higher than the pressure of deep space. You have some way to go.

I'm still not clear why you need to achieve this level of vacuum though.

If you think you are generating some sort of force, then why not just put a barrier in the way to block air movement? (I think I might have suggested this when you discussed this before.)

The other thing to do is try objects of different shape and material. For example, if you are generating a force (similar to gravity) then it will work equally on two objects of the same mass. Whereas air movement will vary depending on the shape. So you could make several pieces of the same size (and hence the same mass) and then leave some of them flat and roll some into tight balls. Air movement will affect the flat pieces more than the others. A force similar to gravity will operate on both equally. So if they both move the same way it tells you one thing, and if they both behave differently, then that tells you something else.

 

not relavent to my question is my setup! is that better? and im not talking about gravity. you dont even read the whole thing and then you  speak and separate what ive stated and use them out of context. I have a long road ahead of me and I dont need no strange on the way. 

10 minutes ago, Sensei said:

The closer you are to -30 the better vacuum. I gave you two options to get closer to -30 in the first post in this thread: use double vacuum pumps in series, and use metal and Oxygen technique..

The closer you are to -30 on scale, the less gas you have inside of container, the smaller amount of molecules, with the smaller mass.

With cheap analog vacuum gauge you have no idea whether it is -29.1 or -29.5 or -29.7..

 

thank you again!

I think im actually going to try both of those

3 minutes ago, John Cuthber said:

If the atmospheric pressure is the so called "standard" of 760 mmHg it is impossible to get 30 inches of vacuum.

So pretty much not going to get to 30 with standard equipment? or would digital be any benefit like sensors versus mechanical even if im not making it to 30?

1 minute ago, Ghideon said:

My best guess is that the vacuum required depends on what kind of physical force that is going to move the matter in the jar and what claims you are looking to support. You need "enough vacuum" to remove any doubts that the matter is indeed moved by remaining air (=fan) instead of the effect you are looking for. One way of initial testing might be to run the experiment at lower and lower pressure and see how it affect the outcome and how it matches your expectations. Does something special happen when you get close to 30 that makes you expect a significantly improved result at 29?

Are you looking for some radiation pressure effect? Static electricity?

 

At the scale of planetary systems I guess gravity is the dominant force.

Yes to the first but more about the feature that I want to add and if i need 30 inches for an important reason or not.  

As for gravity im not saying thats what im doing but there is a feature of all planets that I noticed that I may have been able to harness or whatever. It does the same thing repeatedly on every test. Its not a fan or representing a fan in any way. It is specifically designed to do what it is doing. 30 inches is the only one I haven't been able to get too for a while now!

and its not hand made its 3d printed.

2 minutes ago, John Cuthber said:

OK Thredbarron,

It's going to work better if you start at the beginning.
I doubt that you woke up one morning and thought "Just for kicks, I will hook a vacuum pump and gauge to a jar".

What are you trying to do or find out?

 

No one listens to what I type about what im doing and some tend to simply pretend that im not doing this in speculations. So I would but moving matter without touching it is what im describing it as and I wanted to do it in a vacuum as far as I can with what resources I have. What I want to know is how much does it really in space or anywhere matter that one inch. only because my setup wont pull that on my guage and if I need to upgrade it would be because that one inch difference has more importance then lets say 15 to 30.  

4 minutes ago, Strange said:

You asked what context was missing. I am trying to be helpful by pointing out some of the extra information (context) that you could have provided.

Context can be vital. There clearly wasn't enough information in your first post to answer your question. 

Yes, that's the point. YOU know that. No one else does. Unless you tell them. (Someone cleverly guessed it. I wouldn't have.)

I can't see where I have been insulting. But feel free to report my post(s) to the moderators.

I don't know more than you (about your setup) that is why I was asking questions.

I also tried to make some helpful suggestions about alternative approaches to the problem.

But have it your own way.

How much does it matter from 29 to 30 in reality not in my chamber? so the context would be space since thats where most the vacuum is! How much in relation to that does that 1 inch specifically from 29 to 30 hg (hg because thats what im used to). planets might be involved in space so thats why thats there. Im using what I have observed about vacuum and pressure relationships but I wanted to know more of the finer details about the difference in that specific range and if what im doing requires me to get to that. Maybe my pump is bad or my gauges but if I needed the 30 then I would pursue that but if not then my questions have been answered either way. I didnt think it was that hard of a question. If I showed you my setup all you will do is tell me how jacked up you think it is. Good thing thats not my question so my setup is irrelevant. Sensei Gave me something useful so maybe I can look at it from a different perspective at least.

How about from 15 to 30 in relation to earth?

2 minutes ago, Strange said:

No way of knowing.

Well, not by moving the air obviously. A build up of electric charge would do it.

How are planets relevant to this?

Being a scientist has nothing to do with it.

Some of the context has been dragged out of your slowly and painfully. Some was clever guesses by members here. Some is still not clear.

Here is a summary of some of the context missing from your original post:

• What is the "jar"? (Size, construction, seal, etc)
• Why are you trying to create a vacuum?
• There is a vacuum pump - what is the spec of the pump? What pressure does it claim to achieve? Do you know about other techniques, such as "getters" to reduce the pressure?
• What doe 30 in Hg and? Seems it is from a vacuum gauge (so is relative pressure, not air pressure) although you still haven't admitted that.
• How the jar sealed?
• How are you measuring the pressure?
• How do you move the matter? Apparently some sort of spinning object that moves the air (the "not a fan")
• How large is this spinning object (the "not a fan")?
• What shape is it?
• What is it made of?
• How fast is it spinning?
• What are you trying to achieve?

So people have answered some of these by guesswork. And you have given away a tiny bit more information. Do you see why it is hard to answer your questions when you keep so many important details a secret?

Anyway, I don't know what you are trying to do. If the purpose of the vacuum is to prevent the motion of the air caused by your spinning object ("not a fan") form moving the paper, then why not just put a barrier between the "not a fan" and the paper? Then the air movement caused by the "not a fan" cannot move the paper. That would seem a lot simpler.

You could then go another step and use an earthed metal barrier to eliminate the possibility of static buildup on the "not a fan" (which could be made worse by the vacuum) moving the paper.

whats your deal? I only asked a question and you act like your under attack. You dont need to know anything about what im doing. I asked what is the real difference not what do you think of my setup. I get that my gauges are relative to the atmosphere and I dont need to admit anything. Get over yourself. all you have been is insulting. I dont need your help in understanding because all you want to do is pretend to know more then me. 

Sorry the type of gauge im using is an ac system gauges. Im guessing that its not true vacuum and I would need an absolute gauge or something like that or is the vacuum read on a gauge relative no matter what? maybe im not good at asking the right questions. like I said not a scientist.

2 minutes ago, Strange said:

It is impossible to say. I'm not sure why the pressure would be relevant at all. What is moving the paper and why would pressure affect that?

So you have some sort of fan (mechanical system for moving air) and you want to determine at what pressure it will stop working?

I doubt there is an easy answer to that. Only experiment or a detailed finite-element fluid simulation will tell you.

 

So a relative pressure gauge.

This is just yet more "context" that the OP needs to provide.

 

not a fan. The pressure matters because in space there not a lot there. Does it really matter that its 1 inch on a gauge difference is what I want. Not stall testing a fan or anything like that. If I can move matter without touching it in a vacuum then I can move matter without touching it in space. Then im going to add a feature to make it more powerful within a vacuum just like pretty much all planets do. Im not sure what context your looking for but im not a scientist!

2 hours ago, Sensei said:

I think @Theredbarron wants to know what is pressure difference between when gauge shows 29 and when it shows 30 i.e. what means "1 inHg" on gauge expressed using other units.

https://www.google.com/search?q=inch+hg+to+pascal

(eventually change pascal to something else like bar mmHg etc.)

If your gauge has maximum -30 inHg and your reading is -29 inHg you should get better gauge with larger scale..

Like we can see on this gauge "in Hg" is shortcut from "inch Hg". Gauge has also second unit in "cm Hg".

This chart might be interesting to you. Inches Hg are in fourth column.

The get better vacuum scientists/engineers/people use two serial vacuum pumps. https://www.google.com/search?q=two+serial+vacuum+pumps

The get better vacuum you can fill container the first by pure Oxygen (e.g. from electrolysis) and place there (before filling) piece of metal or metal wire. Hermetically close it. Then pass current (large one) through wire, and Oxygen will react with wire, taking even more gas from the chamber. This technique was used to make vacuum tubes, light bulbs etc.

 

If you turn off pump, and leave it this way for a while how fast pressure is returning to normal? You could make video on YouTube (but please place camera on tripod). If it is slowly returning (not within seconds), use timelapse. It will be interesting project for you. It will tell how hermetic is your entire chamber and connections.

 

thank you. 

So what im getting is that if I were to move pieces of paper in a jar without actually contacting the paper, How much does that 1 inch of vacuum truly matter in a grand scale of things? It doesn't leak down at all. I pump it for about an hour or more depending on if I remember that its on. there is a motor built into the chamber that spins a wheel thats not connected to anything except by air. It moves the paper pieces the same way in 15 in or 29 in. Im just not seeing how getting to 30 is going to make a difference. I use paper just because it light and easy to get. I can do smoke by igniting one in the chamber after vacuum is applied so that the smoke is not pumped out. Im not sure what other stuff I can put in the jar thats light enough for this to move. 

2 hours ago, Strange said:

What is in the jar?

Is the jar sealed?

What is the jar made of?

How do you move the matter?

What does this have to do with measuring pressure?

How are you measuring the pressure?

Why does the pressure in the jar matter?

That is the sot of context required.

I would keep asking questions separate from presenting a "theory" if I were you.

I know from practical experience with properly maintained lab equipment that it can still be really hard to create a good seal to pump the air of of something. If you are doing this with homemade equipment (a "jar" - what sort of jar? a jam jar with a screw top?) then I am not surprised if you can't get just below air pressure.

How much difference is it? It is 1 in Hg (about 0.5 psi).

How much difference does it make to what?

It is roughly equivalent to being 1,000 feet above sea level. It will reduce the boiling point of water by about 1º. Does that help?

dont worry im not trying to prove anything here. Im looking for the fine details.

23 minutes ago, swansont said:

OK, there’s a pump. That’s a detail not originally included. You’re moving matter around. Gas is matter, so knowing details us important.

If it’s full of smoke that might be a problem, since particulates might be clogging the pump and/or gauge.

True but I was using smoke as an example of what it can move. I have not used smoke yet because I have been trying to get to 30. Thats why im asking how much of a real difference does it make between 29 and 30? and you said it air is matter! 

What do you mean context? its in a jar and I can move the matter whatever it is like paper or smoke particles stuff that I can fit in the jar and not break the glass while its flung around in it. Speculations because its my own theory that im working on/

the problem is that I cant get the jar down to 30 on the mechanical gauge. Im not sure if its not getting to 30 or if the pump or gauge is off some way. I wanted to know how much of a difference is it really from 29 to 30 in hg

How much does it matter if I can move matter in what appears to be 29 in hg on my gauge from 30 inches? only reason I ask is because I cant get the gauge to read lower.

Just now, Moontanman said:

Can you show a relationship between speed and gravity? 

Its not just speed its also the imperfections of the surface of what is rotating and the size of what is rotating and whats surrounding it. Thats just planets. To replicate electricity we use artificial magnets and spin them. So I created something that is designed to generate drafts only because all of the planets are rotating and have a certain amount of imperfections. Even hurricanes have a low pressure zone in the middle thats rotating. it would be very hard to calculate each planets imperfections and how it would create a draft effect. So Einstein used comparison to calculate. I have even placed this in a different setup and still came up with the same overall result. that is all matter surrounding is still moving to the center of rotation. It will have a capacity. The gases density surround its rotation will effect is overall capacity or effect because I dont know its only comparison at this point. I only found something that ties a lot together and I thought the science community should be the first to know for more the one reason. 

Even if its against the grain I have a responsibility to investigate!

The simplest way I can say how the effects most easily created is by draft. What is really happening is much more detailed then just a draft. This is where it get confusing. Inside a draft in comparison to whats outside is a lower density. The true details of density is how many electrons, protons and neutrons are occupying a given space at a given time in all matter. So If I gave you a source of 12v dc and it had to charge a battery that was at 6v dc it would have a 6v differential. All of that is above 0. So if all matter is made of electrical properties then the higher value would push into the lower one. What I'm saying is that all matter is subject to this and it does have magnetic like properties or effects on matter in this way. It appears as vacuum and pressure but thats the result of the effects for this attraction.

Gas is matter to. Its very light so its the first to go. 

I haven't even got to the core yet. 

12 minutes ago, Moontanman said:

You are going to have to be a bit more precise than that, If we have talked about this before I don't remember it... 

what are you on about exactly? 

Einstein solved all the math with comparison logic of the planets and a whole lot more. But I am purposing that the functions of how to create said force is not proven yet. Saying he proved the functions of it to me is like saying knowing the horsepower of an engine is the same as knowing how the horsepower is created by said engine. The only thing I found from all of what is out there is that its simply matter occupying space and nothing to do with motion. But when you look at all things demonstrating gravity why are they all in motion? Einstein did not leave this for us to just stop there at the numbers. You would be nieve to think only one man can think that way then believe in evolution and not think that we can all understand with time.

3 minutes ago, Moontanman said:

So what are you on about? If you are going to get smacked get smacked for being direct not tap dancing around... 

I have no idea how to be direct about this. You can spout numbers and things from education and all you want. It was to easy to prove a certain thing to myself that I find it very hard to understand how this is not part in the action of creating gravity. I know it sounds stupid to all of you but I decided to use common denominator logic in a physical sense and this is what I came up with. The results repeat themselves every time. Change one thing then the results change. Very basic as I hope I have said before. This is not a game to me even if it sound like it. There is a common thing between everything and its very hard to explain with words especially since I clearly suck at it. Drafting is a very rudimentary term but I dont know any other words to use.  Its not just simply drafting either so it confusing because its much more detailed in its action then just that. Thats why I have been saying density so much and electrical properties so much. So I thought this would be the easiest route for some reason because its so easy to replicate without too expensive of materials. A visual would be easier then me trying to explain all that and convince you in doing so. Does that at least make sense why I would come here? This would in fact be the best route logically for anything like this even if I am so convinced. Is that enough because I'm not one of those gimmicks?