% of Earth's Atmosphere Passing Through a Gate?

The calculations are dead simple, but you do need the key datum of weight of the entire atmosphere.

If WEIGHT of the entire atmosphere was given, one would also need the average temp and (static) pressure of the air passing through the "gate".

True, but those are the minor data, for which reasonable estimates can be given without much specialized knowledge.

The answer is ZERO%. Because American football goal posts do not have any gates.

Not enough information.

At 4000ft my goalpost will be in a mine with no airflow other than what is pumped into the mine.

Are we assuming that the atmosphere is stationary and the post is moving past the air at almost 100 miles per hour?

Tweedledee and Tweedledum had such a dialogue, if my recollection is not faulty.

May we agree that the question will never be asked accurately enough to accomodate the wave function of quantum probabilities?

In other words, "what you get is what you look for", and if you look for flaws in the question, you will find them. Thank you Tornado.

The way the question is posed does not require the total mass of the atmosphere, although that could be A WAY to answer.

The variables referred to as "needed" for a "guestimate" are SWAMPED by the chaos attendent to air circulation patterns, particularly in the "horse latitudes":

thus, they are negligible for this matter, imho.

Anything not off by more than a factor of 5 would be genius, around my desk..

That's half an order of magnitude.

This pee's on "temperature" and "pressure" and adiobatic miscellanea.

The assumption of 10 mph average velocity cancels out the alleged chaos effects. One can look up or guess the average air temperature in the Sonoran Desert. The average pressure will be a bit less than one atmosphere, on account of the altitude. Simple arithmetic then gives the volume (and mass) of air through the "gate" in one year. Divide by the total atmospheric mass (the key datum) and multiply by 100 to get percent. This should easily be within a factor of 0.8 to 1.25 of the true value.

As regards your comment,

"The assumption of 10 mph average velocity

cancels out the alleged chaos effects."

it (the assumption) may eliminate consideration of the matter in the calculation,

but it assuredly does NOT eliminate it as huge source of potential error

in the results achieved. To ask the question and specify INCLUSION of the data

relating to circulation models, would be exclusive of all respondents

except those with access to hours of mainframe time.

AND, given that the intent of the inclusion of the statement regarding chaos

was to "dis" the adiobatic variables, by comparison,

it is my current position that you are wrong, and I am right.

on that point.

The 10 mph average velocity was your assumption, in the OP (in which there was no mention of chaos). Get a dictionary and look it up. Since you started with that assumption, I am entitled to use it.

Throwing in chaos later on simply changed the subject, rendering your subsequent posts OT, if not just plain ridiculous.

Thank you very much.

I really appreciate the assistance. It will be used for good purpose.