Setting The Record Straight Regarding Enclosed Cosmologist Claims That the Imaginary Vacuum of Imaginary Outer Space Sucks Away The Earth’s Atmospheric Pressure Like a Hoover Vacuum

Oct 24, 2025

No sensible Enclosed Cosmologist literally claims that the imaginary vacuum of imaginary Outer Space sucks away The Earth’s atmospheric pressure like a Hoover Vacuum:

That’s absurd nonsense. Rather, it’s a Second Law of Thermodynamic claim that high pressure will seek to fill any available volume in any surrounding low pressure region unless a solid and impermeable barrier prevents such evacuation. This is a testable, repeatable, observable, scalable, and predictable Thermodynamic fact that no scientist or engineer disagrees with.

And then, Heliocentrists waltz in and inject Thermodynamics with magic Gravity as a pseudo barrier against the imaginary vacuum of imaginary Outer Space in order to violate The Second Law of Thermodynamics. It just shows, once again, how far from legitimate science Heliocentrism has graduated. Essentially, Heliocentrism is the best example of egregious pseudoscience that we have thus far encountered in history.

Containment, which means a solid and impermeable barrier, is the necessary antecedent for atmospheric pressure gradients, in the first place.

Containment is the Necessary Antecedent For Atmospheric Pressure Gradients

For gas pressure gradients to form and remain intact contiguous to a vacuum, the necessary antecedent of a container is required, according to The Second Law of Thermodynamics. In other words, without solid and impermeable containment, there could be no atmospheric pressure gradients at all, again according to Thermodynamic Law. The Second Law of Thermodynamics is a physical law based on universal empirical observation concerning heat and energy interconversions. A simple statement of the law is that heat always flows spontaneously from hotter to colder regions of matter (or “downhill” in terms of the temperature gradient).

From this Einsteinian reimagining of Gravity, we know that fictional Newtonian gravitational attraction has no power to hold singular atoms, regardless of how sparse or densely stratified, nor The Earth’s atmospheric pressure gradients from being immediately “pushed upwards” in a homogenous confluence out into the imaginary vacuum of Outer Space. Further, by no means can gravitational attraction serve or behave as a barrier between The Earth and the alleged vacuum of Outer Space. Fictional Gravity is not a container.

This being the case, and since The Earth, indeed, possess a pressurized atmosphere with atmospheric pressure gradients, the claim that The Earth is surrounded by an Outer Space vacuum is null and void, and the container is rightly and logically inferred to be The Firmament.

Now, if one wants to propose Gravity as a form of containment, this is a violation, as has been pointed out, of The Second Law of Thermodynamics. One certainly can propose a gravitational theory of containment, but according to The Second Law of Thermodynamics and the established Laws of Gas Pressure that engineers and scientists use every day, such a proposition still retains its place as an order of Thermodynamic Law violation. It appears that the real battle being waged here between Heliocentrists and Enclosed Cosmologists is the type of atmospheric containment being proposed, either gravitational in nature or by virtue of a Firmament. What’s more fascinating is the degree of viciousness that BOTH sides employ in framing sand stating their arguments. It’s merely a scientific question, but some people approach it as if it is a blood sport, with high emotions, volatility, and sometimes, couched in vulgar ad hominem personal attacks.

When this particular question concerning atmospheric containment de-evolves into an attack on an opponent’s character, rather than an opportunity to address the scientific claims being made, this is when we can see what the true agenda is in the attacker. It’s not scientific Truth. Rather, it’s a quest for some kind of emotional compensation for having been challenged on a worldview, a retaliation against any who might have challenged a worldview, and/or a simple primal defense mechanism to protect a cultish group identification with a worldview.

Containment is the Necessary Antecedent For Atmospheric Pressure Gradients: Fictional Gravity is Not a Container

Containment:

Additionally, Gravity is no longer defined as mass attracting mass as described by Newtonian rhetoric, and was superseded by Einstein in 1915 in his publication, “General Theory of Relativity”. Einstein had overthrown the idea of the Newtonian mass attracts mass claim with his fantastical, nonsensical, and imaginary 4th dimensional pseudo Riemannian bending of space and time. From this Einsteinian reimagining of Gravity, we know that fictional Newtonian gravitational attraction has no power to hold singular atoms, regardless of how sparse or densely stratified, nor The Earth’s atmospheric pressure gradients from being immediately “pushed upwards” in a homogenous confluence out into the imaginary vacuum of Outer Space. Further, by no means can gravitational attraction serve or behave as a barrier between The Earth and the alleged vacuum of Outer Space. Fictional Gravity is not a container.

Again, Gravity, as defined in modern academia, is a concept of the 4th dimensional pseudo Riemannian bending of space and time, caused by the uneven distribution of mass in a geodesic framework.

It’s purely a mathematical construct and concept, born from the mind of plagiarist, Albert Einstein:

You cannot apply practical science using the scientific method to a concept. The scientific method requires a physical environment in which to test your independent variable and hypothesis, which must be a real physical thing and not merely an abstract concept. As such, Einstein’s nonsensical and imaginary 4th dimensional pseudo Riemannian bending of space and time concept was literally invented to save the Heliocentric concept from complete demolition over 110 years ago, and is heavily contested in academia today because it falls apart at the quantum scale.

It’s important to educate people to stop calling Gravity a theory because it is not a theory. It is simply a concept, which cannot be tested using the empirical scientific method. Also, anytime scientists attempt to test for Gravitational attraction, they can never wholly isolate their independent variable, and so, they can never entirely rule out the role of object density, atmospheric density, atmospheric pressure, buoyancy, electrostatic effects, electromagnetic effects, or dielectric effects etc…as possible causes for downward vectors.

In fact, more empirically speaking, objects fall or rise due to the relationship, ratio, and dynamism between:

1. Object Density

2. The Index of Buoyancy of an Object

3. Dielectric Forces

4. Electrostatic Attraction

5. Ferrous and Non-Ferrous Magnetism

6. Electromagnetic Forces

7. Aerodynamic Resistance

8. Thermodynamic Exchange

9. The Result of an Object in a Particular Atmospheric Medium

10. The “Aetheric Wind” (Luminiferous Aether)

Again, Gravity is no longer defined as mass attracting mass as described by Newtonian rhetoric, and was superseded by Einstein in 1915 in his publication, “General Theory of Relativity”. Einstein did not apply any practical science using the scientific method to his conceptual mathematical framework because it cannot be done, yet masses of people still believe that Einstein’s Theory of Relativity has some scientific validity or real credibility. It does not. It’s all mathematical wizardry based upon conceptual fantasy. Einstein’s field equations, which were published in November of 1915, were purely mathematical and only offer a description of the imaginary warping and bending of spacetime in a 4th dimensional concept. Contrariwise, Natural Science, which is based in the real 3-dimensional world that we all inhabit, provides theories by following the scientific method, and Natural Science cannot be adulterated by mathematical concepts. It stands firmly upon the grounds of testable, repeatable, demonstratable, and scalable conditions and parameters.

All Fictional Einsteinian Nonsense:

The Myth of Gravity and Newton’s Fictional Downward Force Vector in Terms of Gravity Versus Weightlessness: Newton’s Gravitational Model Refutes Itself

Often Heliocentrists confuse weightlessness with Gravity. They sometimes say, with respect to objects in orbit, “They are in free fall and therefore Gravity is cancelled.”, which illustrates their lack of understanding of Newtonian Mechanics, for the concept of Gravity does not get cancelled in this model.

Heliocentrists are conflating two different situations:

1. Gravity, which is a derivation of acceleration, spherical symmetry, and static mass.

2. Weightlessness, which is a derivation of hypothetical acceleration, directional vectors, and falling mass.

According to The Heliocentric Model, there is a shared gravitational property to all matter, which accounts for what we call, “the gravitational force”. Gravity is thought to be the result of an invisible, unconfirmed, theoretical particle known as The Quantum Graviton. When we consider the homogeneous summation of these collective molecular vectors, resulting in the spherical symmetry of Earth, all the horizontal components cancel out, resulting in an amalgamated downward force towards the center of The Earth. This is the erroneous model that we have been presented with by modern science.

In this erroneous model, the overall Spherical Symmetry of The Earth is an assumption that Heliocentrists operate beneath in order to derive various mathematical models concerning the way in which upward, and side to side gravitational vectors cancel out in a spherical model, resulting in the downward force called gravitational acceleration.

Flat Earthers Don’t Understand Gravity?:

In other words, in this gravitational model, Gravity is literally conferred to mass by virtue of its presence, while mass is literally imbued with gravitational attraction by virtue of its specific Gravity. It’s a classic dog-chasing-its-tail, chicken-or-the-egg, self-recursive feedback loop of nonsensical paradox. In this model, there is no way to isolate nor determine which comes first, mass, or gravitational attraction. Together, they are not mutually exclusive variables, meaning that they are two events that happen simultaneously, and by extension, independently, with neither dependent upon the other, which completely contradicts Newton’s gravitational model, and therefore, nullifies both as mutually derivative events, thereby resulting in logical absurdities.