(March 22, 2015 at 6:14 pm)Chas Wrote:(March 22, 2015 at 4:16 pm)BrianSoddingBoru4 Wrote: It wouldn't matter, drich. Atmospheric pressure (from your link) is defined as the weight of air from sea level to the top of the atmosphere. As water level increases, the atmosphere doesn't get taller. If sea level were to be re-established at the top of Mt Everest, you'd be five miles closer to the top of the atmosphere, so the pressure would be correspondingly less - you don't get five more miles of atmosphere to compensate.
Your earlier point about the definition of 'har' fails as well, since the verse in Genesis includes all mountains 'under the heavens', not just the ones the myth-makers knew about.
Boru
Sorry, no. While drich is not quite right, you are quite wrong.
Five miles of water would not appreciably change the sea level air pressure. And, yes, the top of the atmosphere would move up.
(March 22, 2015 at 4:51 pm)IATIA Wrote: The pressure would push the air further into the upper atmosphere where the gravity would not be sufficient to hold it back at those pressures and allow the air to dissipate into space. The air would not get denser, it would still be subject to gravity and when the waters receded ... oops, where is all our air we had? It will not come back.
No, the entire atmosphere moves. There wouldn't be any appreciable change or loss.
I accept and appreciate the correction.
Boru
‘I can’t be having with this.’ - Esmeralda Weatherwax
