The Water Below and Above the Expanse

[Audie]

The firmament is not befitting to the text, that's the reason the Jewish translations use expanse. An expanse is an ocean, the sky is an expanse and space is an expanse. Its downto the translators. Thanks for the information on the flood, which may or may not have been world wide.

Firmament / expanse , its just an
equivocation game. Its still nonsense.

And trying to fit the flood story to local is changing the text
In a very dishonest way.

 

[wellwisher]

This can be explained with the phases of water at extreme temperature and pressure. If we go back to the very early earth, since it was very very hot, water on the surface would have been more of a molten water/mineral fluid, based on water phases such as super critical water, which is water above its critical point, as well as mineral phases containing super-ionic and ionic water. The atmosphere may have been supercritical water and not steam.

Superionic water, also called superionic ice or ice XVIII,[1] is a phase of water that exists at extremely high temperatures and pressures. In superionic water, water molecules break apart and the oxygen ions crystallize into an evenly spaced lattice while the hydrogen ions float around freely within the oxygen lattice.[2] The freely mobile hydrogen ions make superionic water almost as conductive as typical metals, making it a superionic conductor.[1] It is one of the 19 known crystalline phases of ice. Superionic water is distinct from ionic water, which is a hypothetical liquid state characterized by a disordered soup of hydrogen and oxygen ions.

Today, the superionic water phase of water is restricted to the upper and middle mantle, while the ionic phase of water is in the lower mantle and the outer core. The hot hydrogen ions of ionic water react with the metallic iron core to release electrons to the oxygen ions. Unlike supersonic water, where the oxygen share electrons in the solid oxygen matrix, ionic water allows free oxygen to hold extra electron density, temporarily, as the hydrogen ion induced freed iron electrons, work to the surface.

Water leaking into Earth's core may have birthed a mysterious layer that churns out crystals

In the early earth, these extreme water phases were all much closer to the surface and even in the atmosphere, due to the much hotter conditions; super critical water atmosphere. As the earth cooled, these extreme phases were more and more restricted to below the crust and then deeper toward the inner earth and iron core. The less extreme phases; liquid water and water vapor started to appear in the atmosphere as torrential rains for the cooling of the oceans. Waters from the waters is about these phases changes as a function of radial earth position and temperature drop; dense mineral fluids phased changing into modern surface and atmospheric liquid water.

Super-ionic water is still key to plate movement. If we lower the pressure and temperature of super-ionic water, the solid oxygen matrix and mobile hydrogen ions of superionic water become unstable. The solid oxygen matrix will blow apart like TNT, to form supercritical or hydrothermal water; distinct H20. If the crust is rising, there will often be a pressure drop at the mantle crust interface.

There is a scare on the floor of Atlantic Ocean where cooled the mantle minerals are exposed. This would have required a super-ionic to hydrothermal phase transition of water, on the ocean floor, to separate out the insoluble mantle materials; massive undersea explosion. I can imagine the cooling of the early earth, causing the descending super-ionic layer, to send out massive blasts, as it changes phase with the phase retreating to the mantle, due to the cooling.

 

[YoursTrue]

Genesis 1

According to chapter one of Genesis, there is an expanse that separates water from water as follows:
(Bold emphasis ours)

6 God said, (to the source), "become" (hayah) an expanse in the midst of the water, that it may separate water from water." 7 And God made (asah - עָשָׂה) the expanse and it separated between the water that was below the expanse and the water that was above (al - עַל) the expanse, and it was so. 8 And God called the expanse Heaven, and it was evening, and it was morning, a second day.
(Translation - Rabbi A.J. Rosenberg)

Now when God made (asah - עָשָׂה), I.e. completed the expanse (Heaven), this was the first heaven. For example, according to chapter one of Genesis, the birds fly across the expanse (heaven) of Heavens as follows:

20 And God said, "Let the waters swarm a swarming of living creatures, and let fowl fly over the earth, across the expanse of the heavens."
(Translation - Rabbi A.J. Rosenberg)

Therefore verse twenty is the first heaven/sky (expanse) of heavens which the birds fly across, and verses 6-8 is the same expanse (heaven/sky) that separates the water below, I.e. the Earth's oceans, from the water above. But what are the waters above the expanse (heaven/sky)? Firstly the concept of heaven (sky) or heavens can be described as the space above the earth, although there are no real boundaries as to where heaven (sky) ends or space begins. Secondly, because there are no boundaries, the expanse can be described as the atmosphere that starts from the surface of the Earth and includes the following seven layers:

● Troposphere
○ This layer is on average it is 7.5 miles in height from the surface of the earth toward the sky
○ Nearly all the atmospheric water vapour (99%) is found in this layer and is where the majority of the weather takes place
● Stratosphere
○ This extends upwards from the tropopause to about 32 miles and holds 19 percent of the atmosphere's gases but very little water vapour
○ The ozone layer is found within the stratosphere. Ozone molecules in this layer absorb high-energy ultraviolet (UV) light from the Sun, converting the UV energy into heat
● Mesosphere
○ This layer extends upward to a height of about 53 miles above the earth
○ The gases in the mesosphere are thick enough to slow down meteors hurtling into the atmosphere, where they burn up, leaving fiery trails in the night sky
● Thermosphere
○ This layer extends from about 56 miles to between 311 to 621 miles above the earth's surface
○ The Temperatures in the upper thermosphere can range from about 500° C (932° F) to 2,000° C (3,632° F) or higher
● Ionosphere
○ This layer is located within the thermosphere and extends from about 56 to 190 miles above the earth's surface, and is made of electrically charged (ionized) gas particles
● Exosphere
○ This is the outermost layer of the atmosphere. It extends from about 375 miles to 6,200 miles above the surface of the earth
○ In this layer, atoms and molecules escape into space and satellites orbit the earth

From this, it is important to note that the seven layers of the atmosphere can be defined as an expanse, but are any of these layers separating the waters above, I.e. in the universe? Firstly verses 6-8 are still part of the early stages of God's creation. For example, concerning the water below the expanse, the following information can be considered:

A team of scientists at Arizona State University (ASU), led by Peter Buseck, has come up with a new proposal. The new peer-reviewed paper was published in the Journal of Geophysical Research: Planets on October 9, 2018.

The new research suggests that Earth’s water came from both rocky material, such as asteroids, and from the vast cloud of dust and gas remaining after the sun’s formation, called the solar nebula.

Earth’s ocean water is similar to that found in asteroids. That’s one reason scientists have long thought that most earthly water came from an asteroid bombardment in the days of the early solar system.

Also, Samples from asteroid Itokawa collected by a Japanese space probe suggest that Earth's water may have been created by the sun.

This water may have rained on the fledgling Earth in the form of dust grains produced by the interaction of the solar wind, the stream of charged particles emanating from the sun, with various bodies in the solar system, a new study suggests.

"The solar winds are streams of mostly hydrogen and helium ions which flow constantly from the sun out into space," Luke Daly, a planetary scientist at the University of Glasgow in the U.K., and a lead author of the new paper said in a statement. "When those hydrogen ions hit an airless surface like an asteroid or a spaceborne dust particle, they penetrate a few tens of nanometers [one inch has 24.5 million nanometers] below the surface, where they can affect the chemical composition of the rock."
(Earth's earliest water may have come from solar wind and space rocks)

And astronomers have discovered the largest and oldest mass of water ever detected in the universe — a gigantic, 12-billion-year-old cloud harbouring 140 trillion times more water than all of Earth's oceans combined.

The cloud of water vapour surrounds a supermassive black hole called a quasar located 12 billion light-years from Earth. The discovery shows that water has been prevalent in the universe for nearly its entire existence, researchers said.

"Because the light we are seeing left this quasar more than 12 billion years ago, we are seeing water that was present only some 1.6 billion years after the beginning of the universe," said study co-author Alberto Bolatto, of the University of Maryland, in a statement. "This discovery pushes the detection of water one billion years closer to the Big Bang than any previous find."
(Astronomers Find Largest, Oldest Mass of Water in Universe)

Therefore based on the above information shows that in the early formation of the Earth, the mesosphere, which is the layer where the gases are thick enough to slow down meteors and cause them to burn up, and possibly the other layers of the Earth's atmosphere could have contributed to the amount of water upon the Earth, which some scientists suggest was caused by asteroids and the cloud of dust and gas remaining after the sun’s formation.
I'll
Conclusion

The Bible shows that God called the first heaven/sky an expanse, which extends upwards from the surface of the Earth and includes all seven layers of the Earth's atmosphere, and that below the expanse is water, I.e. the Earth’s oceans, and above the expanse, which is the second heaven is also water that was abundant in the universe during early formation of the Earth.

I'll just say this -- when I see clouds in the sky I have learned that these fluffy things so pretty they can be -- can hold TONS of water. Tons.

 

[Darren0803]

Firmament / expanse , its just an
equivocation game. Its still nonsense.

And trying to fit the flood story to local is changing the text
In a very dishonest way

Firmament / expanse , its just an
equivocation game. Its still nonsense.

And trying to fit the flood story to local is changing the text
In a very dishonest way.

Until proven wrong the account fits with Science. Regarding the flood, like I said, I will study it.

 

[Audie]

Until proven wrong the account fits with Science. Regarding the flood, like I said, I will study it.

Literal flood as per OT has been shown false
10,000 times over.

 

[Heyo]

Until proven wrong the account fits with Science.

It doesn't, and it has been proven wrong numerous times, as @Viker already pointed out. Repeating a false statement endlessly doesn't make it right. You either need a very liberal interpretation of Genesis to make it fit with science, or, and I suspect this is the case, you must be oblivious of the science.

 

[Darren0803]

Please show me which part doesn't conform to science.

 

[Audie]

Please show me which part doesn't conform to science.

Everything in " flood" story, except maybe some nouns.
Like " water".
Not be rude but you dont seem a serious student.

 

[Darren0803]

Everything in " flood" story, except maybe some nouns.
Like " water".
Not be rude but you dont seem a serious student.

Sorry but I already informed you that I am not going off topic. So please show me in my post which part doesn't conform to science.

 

[Heyo]

Sorry but I already informed you that I am not going off topic. So please show me in my post which part doesn't conform to science.

And God made (asah - עָשָׂה) the expanse and it separated between the water that was below the expanse and the water that was above (al - עַל) the expanse, and it was so.

There is no water above the atmosphere that originated from Earth.

And God said, "Let the waters swarm a swarming of living creatures, and let fowl fly over the earth, across the expanse of the heavens."

Between the first life in the ocean and the first birds are about 3.8 billion years. Your quote makes it sound like that happened in short succession (and the birds came before land animals).

Secondly, because there are no boundaries, the expanse can be described as the atmosphere that starts from the surface of the Earth and includes the following seven layers:

Where did you get that there are no boundaries from the text?

The Bible shows that God called the first heaven/sky an expanse, which extends upwards from the surface of the Earth and includes all seven layers of the Earth's atmosphere, and that below the expanse is water, I.e. the Earth’s oceans, and above the expanse, which is the second heaven is also water that was abundant in the universe during early formation of the Earth.

Your text says "separated", I.e. the "waters from below" must have been together with "the waters from above". Any water above the atmosphere was never united with water on the Earth, so it never needed separating.
(As already stated above.)


Those are only the discrepancies in the text you quoted or paraphrased. It gets much more ridiculous when it comes to later passages.

 

[wellwisher]

There is no water above the atmosphere that originated from Earth.


Between the first life in the ocean and the first birds are about 3.8 billion years. Your quote makes it sound like that happened in short succession (and the birds came before land animals).


Where did you get that there are no boundaries from the text?


Your text says "separated", I.e. the "waters from below" must have been together with "the waters from above". Any water above the atmosphere was never united with water on the Earth, so it never needed separating.
(As already stated above.)


Those are only the discrepancies in the text you quoted or paraphrased. It gets much more ridiculous when it comes to later passages.

Science can now show, what I postulated decades ago, that extreme phases of water, are present inside and below the crust all the way to the core of the earth. Water will dissolves its way downward driven by an entropy.

New Evidence for Oceans of Water Deep in the Earth and
Ocean water is leaking inside the Earth! A mysterious layer above core is forming because of it

In the beginning, the forming earth was very hot and these extreme phases of water, that are now below the crust, were on the surface due the extreme birthing conditions of the earth due to bombardment and gravity. Separating the waters from the waters, was the cooling and extreme phases of water, creating a dividing line, so what we see on the surface and atmosphere would become only the ambient phases of water; ice, liquid and gas, with the extreme phases limited to inside and below the crust; hydrothermal, super ionic, ionic and metallic water.

We had a hydrothermal atmosphere at one time. This state of water is like a dense fluid that can dissolve rocks, like liquid water can dissolve sugar. This phase needed to cool down to steam, before the crust could precipitate and stabilize. There was originally no definitive crustal dividing line. I think it is interesting that science needed an update, to make this bible claim work in practice.

I am sort of amazed that science took this long to confirm this water claim. I was way ahead of the game, using all the new data that was appearing about the inner earth, but I was not invited to play, since truth in science is called crazy, by the bureaucracy of science, until that slow boat can catch up, without rocking the boat.

Science should now be able understand that climate change is also connected to the water below the crust, and not just the water above. The water above is easy to see. Water has thermal capacitance, ocean currents, ice at the poles for a global thermal gradient, solar evaporation, clouds and all forms of weather that involve high and low pressure systems. CO2 is a minor player when we also include inner earth water and the impact of the oxidizing or rusting iron core. The core is being rusted by extreme water and giving off electrons and energy; an endless source of potential surface energy. The evaporation of surface water by the sun, to create clouds and weather, make the atmosphere positive; separated hydrogen bonds of liquid water. This helps pulls the released iron core electrons to the surface; lighting and the alkaline or negative charge of the oceans. Water then moves through the layers toward the core. Surface geology becomes more active; new material formation.

Currently a huge pool of cool water is forming near Ecuador and the Galapagos Islands. How can this cool water form if we have atmospheric based global warming by CO2. It has to do with less heat venting from the ocean floor via the mantle; dah.
https://www.npr.org/2022/12/20/1144...t-of-the-galapagos-islands-are-getting-colder

We can take surface water states even further, since water has a unique impact on the state will call life. Life can be modeled with one variable; water, since water touches everything in all cells; organics and ions, and all aspect of life. While water, as the continuous phase of life, also self binds via hydrogen bonding to other the water, so all the water becomes one continuous entity, for the organic cellular integration, that we call life. This may take science time to catch up. Don't wait too long. I do not have forever to say I told you so.

 

[gnostic]

Until proven wrong the account fits with Science. Regarding the flood, like I said, I will study it.

That’s not how Natural Sciences work, Darren0803.

Scientists TEST their hypotheses, they do not “prove” or “disprove” the hypotheses. It is the tests (eg observable evidence, experiments & data) that determine if a hypothesis is science or not science.

No hypotheses are scientifically “true” by-default. Hypotheses have to be tested and verified before any considerations as whether a hypothesis is true.

For a hypothesis to become a new scientific theory ( accepted as science), it must meet ALL 3 REQUIREMENTS:

1. Falsifiability
2. Scientific Method
3. Peer Review

Failing to even meet the 1st requirement (eg the proposed models must be FALSIFIABLE), then the models have already failed. Unfalsifiable models would disqualify it from being a “hypothesis”.

The next requirement (Scientific Method) is the most important.

Scientific Method comprised of many steps, but basically these can be divided and grouped together 2 main procedures:

• FORMULATION OF THE HYPOTHESIS (creating explanatory models & predictive models based on preliminary evidence)
• TESTING THE HYPOTHESIS -
  • (A) finding evidence or performing experiments, obtaining data -
  • (B) this is followed by analysing the all observations, to determine if the hypothesis is PROBABLE (hence verifying the hypothesis) or IMPROBABLE (hence refuting the hypothesis).

Science illiterate creationists often confuse “proving” with “testing”, and “proofs” with “evidence”, they are not synonymous terms in sciences.

it is evidence that determine whether new hypothesis is science or not science - not proof.

Evidence is observation of physical phenomena. Proof is a logical or mathematical model, that are often expressed as mathematical equations or formulas.

Equations are not physical, they are only abstract representations of numbers, variables & constants.

For examples:

• Newton’s 2nd law is an equation involving force, mass & acceleration, so F = m a. That’s proof (equation), not evidence.
• Ohm’s law, V = I R, is proof (equation), not evidence.

Evidence would be measuring the characteristics or properties of the physical objects, measurements of masses (m) of objects, or the measuring the resistance (R) of a conductor (eg resistor). Also can be measured are acceleration (a) of moving objects or measuring the electric current (I).

No hypothesis, no claims, no ideas, etc are true by-default, so for you to say ”Until proven wrong the account fits with Science” only showed that you don’t understand science works.

Your claim don’t fit with science, unless it has been tested true, and the only way to test anything is with evidence, experiments & data.

The thread about the firmament or expanse which separated the water above from the water below, is scientifically wrong.

According To Genesis 1, birds fly in the same firmament of the sky as those of the Sun, Moon and stars. That scientifically wrong.

some creationists believe that the firmament is the atmosphere, like what @YoursTrue believe…

I'll just say this -- when I see clouds in the sky I have learned that these fluffy things so pretty they can be -- can hold TONS of water. Tons.

…but it stated that god created and set the great lights and stars in the firmament of the sky, which would imply that these astronomical objects are set in atmosphere. That’s also scientifically wrong.

3rd, if the firmament is the atmosphere, and that water are above the firmament, then that’s also scientifically wrong, because there are no water above the Earth’s atmosphere.

What scientists distinguish between the Earth’s atmosphere and “outer space” is the Karman line - the altitude of about 100 km above the sea level, where atmosphere ends and outer space starts. This Karman line is located about 1/4 of the Thermosphere (85 to 690 km).

There are no water or water vapours above the Karman line.

Most of the water vapours and clouds exist in the lowest layer of the atmosphere, the Troposphere. While higher clouds can be observed in the Stratosphere and even the Mesosphere, there are no water vapours beyond the Stratosphere, especially not in the Mesosphere and above.

So YoursTrue’s claim there being tons of water in space - “the water above” the firmament or expanse is false, scientifically. Above the Troposphere, the atmosphere are drier, so less water vapours in the Stratosphere, until there are none.

 

[Audie]

Sorry but I already informed you that I am not going off topic. So please show me in my post which part doesn't conform to science.

But you wont look into it yourself.

Its like an alibi.
If one part, a major part is
false, credibility is gone. The
whole story is tossed.
A person can go round and round
trying to define " canopy" or who
knows what, never get anywhere.
But-
Its absurdly easy to disprove the
flood.
Is flood falsufiable?
Like this: polar ice is hundreds of thousands of
years old. Ice floats.

See the problem ?

 

[YoursTrue]

That’s not how Natural Sciences work, Darren0803.

Scientists TEST their hypotheses, they do not “prove” or “disprove” the hypotheses. It is the tests (eg observable evidence, experiments & data) that determine if a hypothesis is science or not science.

No hypotheses are scientifically “true” by-default. Hypotheses have to be tested and verified before any considerations as whether a hypothesis is true.

For a hypothesis to become a new scientific theory ( accepted as science), it must meet ALL 3 REQUIREMENTS:

1. Falsifiability
2. Scientific Method
3. Peer Review

Failing to even meet the 1st requirement (eg the proposed models must be FALSIFIABLE), then the models have already failed. Unfalsifiable models would disqualify it from being a “hypothesis”.

The next requirement (Scientific Method) is the most important.

Scientific Method comprised of many steps, but basically these can be divided and grouped together 2 main procedures:

• FORMULATION OF THE HYPOTHESIS (creating explanatory models & predictive models based on preliminary evidence)
• TESTING THE HYPOTHESIS -
  • (A) finding evidence or performing experiments, obtaining data -
  • (B) this is followed by analysing the all observations, to determine if the hypothesis is PROBABLE (hence verifying the hypothesis) or IMPROBABLE (hence refuting the hypothesis).

Science illiterate creationists often confuse “proving” with “testing”, and “proofs” with “evidence”, they are not synonymous terms in sciences.

it is evidence that determine whether new hypothesis is science or not science - not proof.

Evidence is observation of physical phenomena. Proof is a logical or mathematical model, that are often expressed as mathematical equations or formulas.

Equations are not physical, they are only abstract representations of numbers, variables & constants.

For examples:

• Newton’s 2nd law is an equation involving force, mass & acceleration, so F = m a. That’s proof (equation), not evidence.
• Ohm’s law, V = I R, is proof (equation), not evidence.

Evidence would be measuring the characteristics or properties of the physical objects, measurements of masses (m) of objects, or the measuring the resistance (R) of a conductor (eg resistor). Also can be measured are acceleration (a) of moving objects or measuring the electric current (I).

No hypothesis, no claims, no ideas, etc are true by-default, so for you to say ”Until proven wrong the account fits with Science” only showed that you don’t understand science works.

Your claim don’t fit with science, unless it has been tested true, and the only way to test anything is with evidence, experiments & data.

The thread about the firmament or expanse which separated the water above from the water below, is scientifically wrong.

According To Genesis 1, birds fly in the same firmament of the sky as those of the Sun, Moon and stars. That scientifically wrong.

some creationists believe that the firmament is the atmosphere, like what @YoursTrue believe…



…but it stated that god created and set the great lights and stars in the firmament of the sky, which would imply that these astronomical objects are set in atmosphere. That’s also scientifically wrong.

3rd, if the firmament is the atmosphere, and that water are above the firmament, then that’s also scientifically wrong, because there are no water above the Earth’s atmosphere.

What scientists distinguish between the Earth’s atmosphere and “outer space” is the Karman line - the altitude of about 100 km above the sea level, where atmosphere ends and outer space starts. This Karman line is located about 1/4 of the Thermosphere (85 to 690 km).

There are no water or water vapours above the Karman line.

Most of the water vapours and clouds exist in the lowest layer of the atmosphere, the Troposphere. While higher clouds can be observed in the Stratosphere and even the Mesosphere, there are no water vapours beyond the Stratosphere, especially not in the Mesosphere and above.

So YoursTrue’s claim there being tons of water in space - “the water above” the firmament or expanse is false, scientifically. Above the Troposphere, the atmosphere are drier, so less water vapours in the Stratosphere, until there are none.

I did not say there is "tons of water in space," as you allege I said. I said the clouds contain tons of water. That's a lot of water in the sky. (not space...) It's within the atmosphere. You want to make a big deal about space vs. the sky and atmosphere where the clouds are? Go ahead, I probably won't join you. Have a good one.
Oh, there MAY be water in 'space.' I don't know. But I do believe from what I read that there are tons of water in clouds. Tons. Yet they float in the sky.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Sorry but I already informed you that I am not going off topic. So please show me in my post which part doesn't conform to science.

Tell us your flood model and I will tell you how it is refuted. And don't give me that "the one in the Bible" nonsense. Different Christians have different interpretations.

 

[Heyo]

But I do believe from what I read that there are tons of water in clouds. Tons. Yet they float in the sky.

The clouds are still in the sky. Where is the water above the expanse?

 

[YoursTrue]

The clouds are still in the sky. Where is the water above the expanse?

Yes the clouds are still in the sky. I don't know that much about clouds except when they get dark it could mean a storm is coming. But I have read that they contain tons of water which I find fantastic since these clouds "float," if the term can be used, in the sky.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Yes the clouds are still in the sky. I don't know that much about clouds except when they get dark it could mean a storm is coming. But I have read that they contain tons of water which I find fantastic since these clouds "float," if the term can be used, in the sky.

Have you heard of the Ideal Gas Law? That explains how water vapor rises up,

 

[YoursTrue]

Have you heard of the Ideal Gas Law? That explains how water vapor rises up,

No, but frankly I believe it. ok? Neverdaless, those clouds are said to hold tons of water in those fluffy puffs. Water is heavy anyway. (P.S. as we know the atmosphere of the earth changed over time anyway. And I believe that, too.)

 

[Subduction Zone]

No, but frankly I believe it. ok? Neverdaless, those clouds are said to hold tons of water in those fluffy puffs. Water is heavy anyway. (P.S. as we know the atmosphere of the earth changed over time anyway. And I believe that, too.)

Okay, short explanation. Liquid water is heavy, but water in the gaseous phase is light. The density of a gas is directly related to its atomic weight. That is what the Ideal Gas Law tells us. If you remember what a mole is in chemistry that is the number of molecules necessary so that the mass of a mole in grams is equal to the atomic weight of the molecule involved. Oxygen for example has an atomic weight of roughly 32. Water on the other hand has an atomic weight of 18. And nitrogen is a bout 28. You can see that water has a much lower atomic weight than those other two. Many people make the mistake of thinking that humid air is less dense than dry air. As you can see the atomic weights tell us that it is the other way around.

So warm humid air at ground level will rise. It will continue to rise even if it is the same temperature as the surrounding air. As it rises it cools, once again one needs to refer to the Ideal Gas Law. PV = nRT. Where P is the Pressure, V is the volume, n is the amount, R is the Ideal Gas Constant, and T is the temperature. Air pressure drops as one goes up, less air above you means lower air pressure. To balance that out the temperature drops too. Eventually the air is too cool for the water in it to remain in the gaseous state. Water condenses, releasing some heat in the process so which means that it will not all suddenly condense at once. And the water droplets form clouds. There is a balancing act between the liquid water in the clouds weighing them down and the gaseous water still in the air lifting the mass up.