People on skateboards.

Look, here's another, blithering schizophrenic blitherer...

This one's for schoolkids!


 


'Reaction Engines' - LMFAO!!!
[/quote]

Slow clap for Pippy Longstocking, can't actually say anything without breaking the forum rules and spamming threads, can't actually say anything that makes a lick of sense to anyone but your sycophants, nuzzling at your immature schoolgirl frolic through the forums.

nuzzle nuzzle nuzzle

What was that sceptimatic I couldn't hear you properly while you're nuzzling at Appeal Bag's teats.

Quote from: rabinoz on January 11, 2016, 11:04:00 PM

Exactly the same principle pushes a skateboard forward when you kick backward with your foot. In a jet engine, it's the exhaust gas that provides the "kick"

LOL!!!

Kick against what?

Monster Fail.

Your own inertia, you dumb f..k.

These are the three posts in a row SkepticMike made for no good reason just before mine:

Slow clap for Pippy Longstocking, can't actually say anything without breaking the forum rules and spamming threads, can't actually say anything that makes a lick of sense to anyone but your sycophants, nuzzling at your immature schoolgirl frolic through the forums.

Quote from: sceptimatic

nuzzle nuzzle nuzzle

What was that sceptimatic I couldn't hear you properly while you're nuzzling at Appeal Bag's teats.

Quote from: Papa Legba on January 11, 2016, 11:09:40 PM

Quote from: rabinoz on January 11, 2016, 11:04:00 PM

Exactly the same principle pushes a skateboard forward when you kick backward with your foot. In a jet engine, it's the exhaust gas that provides the "kick"

LOL!!!

Kick against what?

Monster Fail.

Your own inertia, you dumb f..k.

I suspect he intends to delete them later for whatever nefarious troll reason, so thought I'd best record them...

Enjoy the wit & wisdom of the FES Australian Electrical Engineers Club!

Slow clap for Pippy Longstocking, can't actually say anything without breaking the forum rules and spamming threads, can't actually say anything that makes a lick of sense to anyone but your sycophants, nuzzling at your immature schoolgirl frolic through the forums.

So much butthurt...

Perhaps not being such a control-freak would cure it, Geoff?

Or getting a sense of humour?

Or just keeping pressing the 'report' button with your bajillion sock-puppets?

Frankly, I have no idea how to cure what ails you; good thing I don't care then, eh?

Quote from: Papa Legba on January 11, 2016, 11:09:40 PM

Quote from: rabinoz on January 11, 2016, 11:04:00 PM

Exactly the same principle pushes a skateboard forward when you kick backward with your foot. In a jet engine, it's the exhaust gas that provides the "kick"

LOL!!!

Kick against what?

Monster Fail.

Your own inertia, you dumb f..k.

Did you just write that?

You did, didn't you?

You really wrote that!

LMFAO!!!

What a LOSER!


Anyhow, here is a post by sceptimatic full of content that you all continue to ignore:

 "There is no solid evidence for your space rocket. Only lies and misinformation.

A rocket has oxidiser with fuel so it produces thrust against a resistance. That resistance is atmosphere.
In your fantasy space you have none of that, so your rocket is going nowhere.
The reality is that your rocket goes vertical from the ground for a small amount of time and then it arcs. It arcs because it has no more power to go vertical.
It then hits its point of full on energy then arcs back down into the drink..

Your space rocket has as much power as a shadow boxer knocking his own shadow out.
Your Earth rocket has enough power to ascend like a fire work, before being spent in short  order.

Now pay attention to real and fake rockets.

The clue is in the maximum thrust that springboards the real rockets/missiles into the air, as opposed to the bicycle speed motion of  the Hollywood special effect one's.


Real rockets and missiles.
In this video of a large model rocket launch, you will notice the springboard effect lift off. There's a very good reason as to why this and any other rocket has to lift off like this. It's called atmospheric stability.
Basically a vertical fairly well balanced dart, if you like.
#" class="bbc_link" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">! No longer available

This next video of a large model shuttle  is similar. It springboards into the sky because it has to for stability of vertical flight, as I mentioned.
Real rockets. It matters not about size because all rockets have to springboard to gain immediate stability at full thrust.
#" class="bbc_link" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">! No longer available

Now let's look at the Hollywood bicycle start rockets. If these rockets were real, they would be covering the launch site in scrap metal and fuel.
No way in hell could something like this reach atmospheric stability.

#" class="bbc_link" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">! No longer available

Simply ridiculous.

#" class="bbc_link" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">! No longer available


Check as many as you want out. It's as clear as day how ridiculous it all is.

Now there are hundreds and hundreds of rocket/missile launches from as many countries as you care to think of.
How many are reality and how many are simply for effect, is anyone's guess.
What they aren't, are SPACE rockets/missiles.
Space rockets do no and have never, existed.  And never will".

What is this springboard effect waffle you are going on about?

Lol you are an idiot.

Oh look; the O.G. blithering blitherer mainframes is here, acting all innocent!

Hi Walter Mitty!

Let's have a look at your reasoning powers again:

Ha ha ha lol!

You don't even understand the composition of matter and how gases behave. Muppet.

i have a degree and you clearly don't. I can feel the jealousy oozing from your every pore. Sorry little boy, go back to masturbating in your parents basement

Oh, dear!

Well, good luck getting an answer out of scepti with that attitude...

Toodle-pip, Mr. Blither!

Lol you are an idiot.

No; you are for believing that shit.

And also for not realising it is obvious you are sokarul.

What's the penalty for sock-puppeting again?

Toodle-pip, Mr. Fail!

Oh look; the O.G. blithering blitherer mainframes is here, acting all innocent!

Hi Walter Mitty!

Let's have a look at your reasoning powers again:

Quote from: Mainframes on October 27, 2015, 11:21:49 AM

Ha ha ha lol!

You don't even understand the composition of matter and how gases behave. Muppet.

i have a degree and you clearly don't. I can feel the jealousy oozing from your every pore. Sorry little boy, go back to masturbating in your parents basement

Oh, dear!

Well, good luck getting an answer out of scepti with that attitude...

Toodle-pip, Mr. Blither!

Quote from: TylerJRB on January 12, 2016, 12:17:06 AM

Lol you are an idiot.

No; you are for believing that shit.

And also for not realising it is obvious you are sokarul.

What's the penalty for sock-puppeting again?

Toodle-pip, Mr. Fail!

How do satellites get into space?

^ not to mention how do we have have a rover on mars? And other craft on many other planets. How did we land on an asteroid?

You flat heads lol, pathetic ideas.

There is 100% evidence for space rockets. Flat Earthers only provide lies and misinformation.

A rocket has oxidiser with fuel so it produces thrust against a resistance. That resistance is the rocket itself.
In real space the vacuum is irrelevent, so your rocket is going places.
The reality is that your rocket goes vertical from the ground for a small amount of time and then it arcs. It arcs because it has an orbital trajectory.
It then hits its escape velocity and manuvers into an orbital trajectory around the earth.

The Saturn V space rocket had as much power as 543 jet fighters.
The Apollo 11 rocket has enough power to put man on the moon.

Real rockets and missiles.
In this video of a large model rocket launch, you will notice the power to weight ratio allows the model rocket to lift off like this.
Basically a vertical fairly well balanced dart, if you like.

#" class="bbc_link" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">! No longer available

This next video of a large model shuttle  is similar. It springboards into the sky because it has a really high power to weight ratio. it has wings and fins for stability of vertical flight in the atmosphere.
Real rockets are made of a lot heavier material and have a much lower power to weight ratio than model rockets. It matters a lot about size because model rockets power to weight ratio is far greater than real rockets and can accelerate a lot faster than real rockets from standing still.

#" class="bbc_link" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">

Now let's look at some real rockets. Notice the precision engineering used in the construction of the launch area so a little damage is caused as possible.
No way in hell could something this powerful not accelerate to reach orbital trajectory.

#" class="bbc_link" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">

Simply breathtaking.

#" class="bbc_link" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">

Check as many as you want out. It's as clear as day how wonderful it all is.

Now there are hundreds and thousands of rocket/missile launches from as many countries as you care to think of.
Many are real rockets and many are model rockets simply for enjoyment.
What they are, is space rockets/missiles and model rockets.
Space rockets have been around for almost 6 decades.

^ not to mention how do we have have a rover on mars? And other craft on many other planets. How did we land on an asteroid?

You flat heads lol, pathetic ideas.

I'm not a flat earther.

But you are sokarul.

For sure.

I can feel the seething hatred for science & barely-contained virgin-rage from here...

You know, you could fix all your problems by getting laid?

See how helpful Legba is?

Toodle-pip, Socky-boy!

Flat Earthers only provide lies and misinformation.

I'm not a flat earther, slow-poke.

If you too dumb to even know that by now then why would anyone read the rest of your tl;dr sci-fi crap-fest?

Toodle-pip, Geoff!

Are you referring to the article below?
If it's so wrong then why did you take the time to edit it out of your post?
You are such a lolcow, blithering blitherer; do you enjoy being 20 people?
Or does it send you mental?
(lol it's sent you mental!)
'Reaction engines' - LMFAO!!!

Help, help, now I'm 20 people - ever thought you might be paranoid, probably not,  the sufferer never knows.

I deleted it because your posts are such are huge waste of space!  Also looking at massive images on my tablet is a pain.

Just in case you had forgotten,  the rocket and jet engines push against the thousands of kilograms of burnt fuel plus extra air in the bypass jet pushed very rapidly out the back.    Just remember gases have mass and are just as much covered by Newton's 3rd Law as solids and liquids.
Just how much push do you think an SR-71would get from the rather thin air at 70,000 ft.

Warning, warning, warning, Will Robinson - Oops, this isn't "Lost in Space" is it, just someone else lost the plot.
big memory dump coming!

Quote from: TylerJRB on January 12, 2016, 12:33:47 AM

^ not to mention how do we have have a rover on mars? And other craft on many other planets. How did we land on an asteroid?

You flat heads lol, pathetic ideas.

I'm not a flat earther.

But you are sokarul.

For sure.

I can feel the seething hatred for science & barely-contained virgin-rage from here...

You know, you could fix all your problems by getting laid?

See how helpful Legba is?

Toodle-pip, Socky-boy!

Quote from: SkepticMike on January 12, 2016, 12:38:19 AM

Flat Earthers only provide lies and misinformation.

I'm not a flat earther, slow-poke.

If you too dumb to even know that by now then why would anyone read the rest of your tl;dr sci-fi crap-fest?

Toodle-pip, Geoff!

Did I call you one? Where? Oh, I get it, Freudian slip there. You throw out so much misinformation and lies even you assumed you were a flat earther, no probs...I forgive you.

You're quite the evidence that getting laid is the cure for getting uptight, how is your ass by the way?

Cool story bros.

You do realise no-one reads your posts though?

Quote from: Empirical on January 11, 2016, 02:27:59 PM

Quote from: sceptimatic on January 11, 2016, 12:27:13 PM

The equal and opposite forces are the forces that exit the rocket and the resistance of the atmosphere.

Ummm, an equal and opposite pair can only apply to a pair of objects. Your saying the two objects are the gas exiting the rocket and the atmosphere. Nothings acting on the rocket.

Correct. Nothing is directly acting on the rocket.

Wow, so no force is acting on the rocket, so they don't even work in the atmosphere now. Lol.

You're quite the evidence that getting laid is the cure for getting uptight, how is your ass by the way?

LOL!!!

Poor old Geoff doesn't even know how to do sex right!

Seems I've just received a PM from SkepticMike...

I wonder what it says?

Should I read it?

Or just delete it?

LOL!!!

This is ace - complete Clown Derf meltdown!

Sceptimatic...Wow... Are you really this dumb?

I tell you what then. Let's take a gun. Let's fire it in space. Will you still get recoil? Yes you will.

A rocket will work in space. It is ejecting/accelerating matter out of the back. Which is passing through a highly tuned nozzle. So its effectively a steady beam of matter.

This is STS 134 launch. Its destination is the ISS. There are other videos of it docking. Also look at a docking video. You will be able to see the position adjusting jets.. And you can watch the reason why this works yourself.

Or wait is this NASA trickery??

I'v e seen docking videos of shuttles in the film "Armageddon." I've seen many more docking videos in films. Are they real?
Don't tell me, you're going to say, " yeah but people have seen real life space rocket launches" and all the rest of it.
Can't you see how easy it is to brainwash you?

Anyway, about your gun and recoil in your space vacuum.
No gun is going too work in a vacuum.
This is where someone will put a video up of a man showing a gun inside a rectangular perspex box, as though it's a space vacuum. Then he'll fire the gun.

Sometimes you just need to  sit back and  realise that those people you trust so dearly, can and do tell lies.
I hate to tell you this but your world is largely run by actors; mostly terrible actors.
Some of it is run by naivety of the parrots.
Very little of it is actually run on truthful science.

Quote from: SkepticMike on January 12, 2016, 12:47:58 AM

You're quite the evidence that getting laid is the cure for getting uptight, how is your ass by the way?

LOL!!!

Poor old Geoff doesn't even know how to do sex right!

Come on love, we can admit it to the rest of the group, it was me and you all night long, my only regret is that I only had 8 inch and no more to give you....my love.

Lol what a psycho!

Anyhoo, this:

The combustion chamber of a rocket is open to the near-infinite vacuum of space.

Therefore, no gas can even be meaningfully said to exist within it, let alone combust.

Any gas introduced therein when the pressurised fuel tank leading to the combustion chamber is opened will simply expand freely into the enormous, zero-pressure vacuum, following the path of least resistance & doing no work whatsoever.

This will continue for as long as the fuel tank & chamber are open to the vacuum, until both exterior & interior pressures are equalised at zero.

It is a beautifully simple concept, fully supported by All the laws of physics, yet you 'round earthers' (lol!) just can't seem to grasp it...


Plus this:

You all claim that the recoil of a gun is a valid analogy for how a rocket works in a vacuum.

Here is why it is not:

With a gun you have object A, the mass of the gun; the expanding propellant, P, the gunpowder, sited between them; and object B, the mass of the bullet.

But with a rocket you ONLY have object A, the mass of the rocket,  & the expanding propellant, P, the fuel.

No object B, see?

Thus, you have removed the necessary recoil mass required to produce motion.

But we know a rocket DOES produce motion, don't we?

Ergo, some other mass MUST be taking the place of object B.

& the ONLY possibility for that other mass is the Atmosphere.

Ergo, NO atmosphere, NO motion; rockets CANNOT function in a vacuum.

Q.E.D.

No matter how hard you try to spin it, cultists, every child knows that You cannot Push on Nothing.

No maths required; only common sense.


Then there's the fact that you are all trying desperately to confine this 'debate' to the wrong branch of physics, i.e. Solid Mechanics rather than Fluid Mechanics...

Kinda dishonest of you, dontcha think?

Pressure-Gradient Forces, Gas Laws, Fluid Mechanics, Continuum Assumption & Joules Expansion are the areas I suggest neutral readers research.

Here's a combustion chamber to laugh at too:



Ooh - vacuum-proof!

Quote from: TylerJRB on January 11, 2016, 05:15:05 PM

Sceptimatic...Wow... Are you really this dumb?

I tell you what then. Let's take a gun. Let's fire it in space. Will you still get recoil? Yes you will.

A rocket will work in space. It is ejecting/accelerating matter out of the back. Which is passing through a highly tuned nozzle. So its effectively a steady beam of matter.

This is STS 134 launch. Its destination is the ISS. There are other videos of it docking. Also look at a docking video. You will be able to see the position adjusting jets.. And you can watch the reason why this works yourself.

Or wait is this NASA trickery??

I'v e seen docking videos of shuttles in the film "Armageddon." I've seen many more docking videos in films. Are they real?
Don't tell me, you're going to say, " yeah but people have seen real life space rocket launches" and all the rest of it.
Can't you see how easy it is to brainwash you?

Anyway, about your gun and recoil in your space vacuum.
No gun is going too work in a vacuum.
This is where someone will put a video up of a man showing a gun inside a rectangular perspex box, as though it's a space vacuum. Then he'll fire the gun.

Sometimes you just need to  sit back and  realise that those people you trust so dearly, can and do tell lies.
I hate to tell you this but your world is largely run by actors; mostly terrible actors.
Some of it is run by naivety of the parrots.
Very little of it is actually run on truthful science.

Ah you see, there's your problem, you have trouble telling fact from fiction, there should be some doctors in your local area that can help you with that.

As for gun recoil in a vacuum or in space, it does work, it even works if the gun fires blanks.

Lol what a psycho!

Come on sweetie, you know how much it turns you on to play hard to get, just admit to everyone you're a woman and you like it from behind.

^ not to mention how do we have have a rover on mars? And other craft on many other planets. How did we land on an asteroid?

You flat heads lol, pathetic ideas.

The only rovers that have been and still are roving about, are roving about in remote areas on Earth. You can tell these are fake, they are the rovers that have crews all around them with video's and camera's, as well as a burger van that sells cold drinks and coffee, as well.

All the video specialists and burger vans, etc, are all omitted from the final film, leaving the star of the show (the rover) to move about.

Mars. 

Come on sweetie, you know how much it turns you on to play hard to get, just admit to everyone you're a woman and you like it from behind.

Do you not realise how bad you're making your side look, Geoff?

Lol I hope not!

Anyhoo; should I read that PM you just sent me?

If you don't say something I'll just delete it, so speak up.

Quote from: sceptimatic on January 12, 2016, 01:01:39 AM

Quote from: TylerJRB on January 11, 2016, 05:15:05 PM

Sceptimatic...Wow... Are you really this dumb?

I tell you what then. Let's take a gun. Let's fire it in space. Will you still get recoil? Yes you will.

A rocket will work in space. It is ejecting/accelerating matter out of the back. Which is passing through a highly tuned nozzle. So its effectively a steady beam of matter.

This is STS 134 launch. Its destination is the ISS. There are other videos of it docking. Also look at a docking video. You will be able to see the position adjusting jets.. And you can watch the reason why this works yourself.

Or wait is this NASA trickery??

I'v e seen docking videos of shuttles in the film "Armageddon." I've seen many more docking videos in films. Are they real?
Don't tell me, you're going to say, " yeah but people have seen real life space rocket launches" and all the rest of it.
Can't you see how easy it is to brainwash you?

Anyway, about your gun and recoil in your space vacuum.
No gun is going too work in a vacuum.
This is where someone will put a video up of a man showing a gun inside a rectangular perspex box, as though it's a space vacuum. Then he'll fire the gun.

Sometimes you just need to  sit back and  realise that those people you trust so dearly, can and do tell lies.
I hate to tell you this but your world is largely run by actors; mostly terrible actors.
Some of it is run by naivety of the parrots.
Very little of it is actually run on truthful science.

Ah you see, there's your problem, you have trouble telling fact from fiction, there should be some doctors in your local area that can help you with that.

As for gun recoil in a vacuum or in space, it does work, it even works if the gun fires blanks.

You stick to your star trek and comic book store. You're  beyond help.

While we wait for SkepticMike to make what's left of his mind up, let's find out what kids are taught in Europe about how jet-propulsion works:


 


'Reaction Engines' - LMFAO!!!

Quote from: SkepticMike on January 12, 2016, 01:10:42 AM

Come on sweetie, you know how much it turns you on to play hard to get, just admit to everyone you're a woman and you like it from behind.

Do you not realise how bad you're making your side look, Geoff?

Lol I hope not!

Anyhoo; should I read that PM you just sent me?

If you don't say something I'll just delete it, so speak up.

Read it, nothing bad

Quote from: SkepticMike on January 12, 2016, 01:10:42 AM

Come on sweetie, you know how much it turns you on to play hard to get, just admit to everyone you're a woman and you like it from behind.

Do you not realise how bad you're making your side look, Geoff?

Lol I hope not!

I know right, you always did say you preferred it straight on rather than on the side. You hope not, well I aim to fulfill your dreams babe.