
Go back to the dark ages where you belong
Sean Hunter thinks:
"1)Atmospheric conditions similar to earth cannot exist in the absence of atmosphere and there would be no atmosphere without gravity.
2)Without gravity there's nothing to keep the water in the bucket."
Sean Hunter is wrong needs to take a physics class that teaches physics that is not dated. Atmospheric conditions similar to earth can indeed exist without gravity. For example, on an extremely long space ship traveling at a constant acceleration of , oh, I don't know, let's say 10 m/s/s relative to an inertial frame of reference. The air on that ship would be compressed by it's "inertia" in much the same way that the air in our atmosphere is compressed by "gravity", and the "inertia" of the water in the buckets at the end of this ship would keep it there just like "gravity" holds it there on earth.
Let's all start arguing about whether or not it is "inertia" that is responsible for the phenomenon of the siphon. Or maybe it's bent space-time. Even more pointless of an argument.
Here's a good one: go up into the Vomit Rocket and see if you can get a siphon going in a state of free-fall. "Gravity" is there doing it's thing, right? Will the siphon work? Does "gravity" just go away when you're in free fall?
Of course, I know next to nothing about general relativity, but it is quite hilarious to read this back-and-forth about whether a fictitious force is responsible for a siphon or not. I suggest that we next discuss whether or not spontaneous generation is possible in a jar containing broth and phlogisticated air.
I bet that if there is anyone out there who actually understands the fundamental physical principles of a siphon they are reading this all and thinking exactly what anonymous coward was thinking:
"fools"