It's 2015 and you aren't even close to owning a Spaceship

I already answered your question, BJ; try using 'the forces' to find out how.

Your intellectual dishonesty is a shining path for other cultists to follow.

Excelsior!

LOL!!!

Quote from: Papa Legba on June 25, 2015, 01:03:28 PM

You can smash Object A into Object B as long as you like, with as many different masses as you like, but the velocity of Object B will NEVER exceed the velocity at which it is smashed into by Object A.

NEVER.

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

What the hell is that supposed to be? Can't you put your idea into words? If not, find a video with words that are audible?

I already answered your question, BJ; try using 'the forces' to find out how.

Which question? I mean, you've said something which implies an answer to the first, but the answer would clearly be wrong, so...

Ok, simple question then. What formula do you believe calculates kinetic energy? What are the variables?

Try telling us, in your own words for a change, what you want to say.

Because a practical demonstration is much harder to hand wave away.

What the hell is that supposed to be? Can't you put your idea into words? If not, find a video with words that are audible?

Or you could, oh I don't know, maybe turn up the volume.

Quote from: Papa Legba on June 25, 2015, 01:19:40 PM

Try telling us, in your own words for a change, what you want to say.

Because a practical demonstration is much harder to hand wave away.

Quote from: legion on June 25, 2015, 01:23:18 PM

What the hell is that supposed to be? Can't you put your idea into words? If not, find a video with words that are audible?

Or you could, oh I don't know, maybe turn up the volume.

Whatever point you think you had, it's dismissed.

Legion: like I say - they got NOTHING.

Newton 3 kills 'space-travel' stone dead.

But they can't admit that, so this thread will never end.

Meh; we all need a hobby...

LOL!!!

BJ: LEARN NEWTON 3 & STOP SPAMMING ME WITH IRRELEVANT FORMULAE, OK?!?!?

What is WRONG with you?

Are you being blackmailed into doing this or what?

Markjo: LOL!!! More crooked lawyer talk...

Legion: like I say - they got NOTHING.

Newton 3 kills 'space-travel' stone dead.

But they can't admit that, so this thread will never end.

Meh; we all need a hobby...

LOL!!!

BJ: LEARN NEWTON 3 & STOP SPAMMING ME WITH IRRELEVANT FORMULAE, OK?!?!?

What is WRONG with you?

Are you being blackmailed into doing this or what?

Markjo: LOL!!! More crooked lawyer talk...

But newton laws are just science and science is deception.

Modestman: Don't you start too!

LOL!!!

BJ: LEARN NEWTON 3 & STOP SPAMMING ME WITH IRRELEVANT FORMULAE, OK?!?!?
What is WRONG with you?

Why is it irrelevant to know more about what Newton's law applies to?
After all, we need to know what variables you're concerned with. Kinetic energy's the more well known example, and it's clearly relevant here: the rocket moves, after all.

If you're so confident, why are you so opposed to finding out the answer?
Hint: Kinetic energy only depends on two variables, and is found by 0.5mv². Now, what do you think the m and the v represent?

I think they represent your desperate attempt to use mathe-magics, algebra-cadabra & any other dishonest voodoo-scientific means you possibly can to escape the FACT that Newton 3 destroys your model of rocketry.

So; why do you do this?

Blackmail, or what?

I think they represent your desperate attempt to use mathe-magics, algebra-cadabra & any other dishonest voodoo-scientific means you possibly can to escape the FACT that Newton 3 destroys your model of rocketry.

If you think maths is voodoo, that would explain a lot.

i think that you're attempting to add needless complexity to an essentially simple subject; moreover one that I've given simple experimental proof for my version of every single step of the way, whilst you have not.

& I'm also wondering why you do this?

But meh; neutrals can decide which of us has intellectual integrity & which of us is a brazen liar...

I don't care either way.

LOL!!!

I believe in you PAPA, BiJane is an evil woman.

I don't care what she is & I don't care what you are either, modestman; just do the experiments & learn the truth.

i think that you're attempting to add needless complexity to an essentially simple subject; moreover one that I've given simple experimental proof for my version of every single step of the way, whilst you have not.

If you think the basic definition of the energy (from which we can find the force) we're talking about is a needless complexity, that's probably because you reject any maths as voodoo.

I believe in you PAPA, BiJane is an evil woman.

Thank you.

I think that every time I prove you wrong, you descend into yet further needless complexity & nit-picking, in a clear attempt to achieve reductio ad absurdum.

& I can't be bothered with that.

As I already said: your intellectual dishonesty throughout this thread shines out for all to see.

&, again, I ask anyone who has followed this thread from the start to perform the simple experiments I suggested, examine the easily obtained evidence I provided, then MAKE YOUR MINDS UP FOR YOURSELVES.

Believe what you like in the end; I do not care.

BJ & her ilk clearly DO care what you believe, though...

A LOT!

& that is so LOL!!!

That would mean more if you didn't think any actual thought was voodoo.

LOL!!!

I never said that.

But that you think I did says all that anyone needs to know about your intellectual capabilities.

Goodnight, derailment-queen; see you tomorrow, where I'll just repeat what I said today if needed.

In the meantime, PLEASE try to get to grips with Newton 3 & free expansion, as well as learn the nature & properties of a vacuum.

& dig up a few NASA experiments on the behaviour of materials in the vacuum of space for us all to examine, too.

Why! There must be thousands for you to choose from; shouldn't be hard, then, should it?

LOL!!!

I never said that.

You said all of our posts were voodoo, so... Yeah, you pretty much did.

In the meantime, PLEASE try to get to grips with Newton 3

Newton's laws apply to forces, not speeds.

& dig up a few NASA experiments on the behaviour of materials in the vacuum of space for us all to examine, too.

The only experimet you'd accept is an actual rocket: except, no, you clearly don't. Every alternative suggested to you, you immediately respond with "But rockets are nothing like..." o matter whether or not the principle is the same.

But did you miss the youtube video already posted that showed a smaller mass hit by a larger mass can go faster than the speed at which it was hit? Or are you just ignoring that?

I think they represent your desperate attempt to use mathe-magics, algebra-cadabra & any other dishonest voodoo-scientific means you possibly can to escape the FACT that Newton 3 destroys your model of rocketry.

Umm...  What's the purpose of invoking Newton's laws if you're afraid of the math upon which those laws are based?

LOL!!!

I never said that.

But that you think I did says all that anyone needs to know about your intellectual capabilities.

Goodnight, derailment-queen; see you tomorrow, where I'll just repeat what I said today if needed.

In the meantime, PLEASE try to get to grips with Newton 3 & free expansion, as well as learn the nature & properties of a vacuum.

& dig up a few NASA experiments on the behaviour of materials in the vacuum of space for us all to examine, too.

Why! There must be thousands for you to choose from; shouldn't be hard, then, should it?

LOL!!!

You seem to have been intellectually spanked by BiJane. You may need a cream for that.

The next installment promises to be entertaining,  watching Papa Legba pretending he hasn't been rounded up hog-tied and hung out to dry by Bijane.   

What's the betting,  it goes denial,  attack,  ridicule,  then a few maniacal  LOL's  thrown in at random.  I'm taking bets at 2:1 any takers?

I quite like the irony that Papa states that Newtons 3rd makes rockets impossible when in reality it was newtons 3rd that inspired people to attempt to build rockets in the first place.....

This video.
" class="bbc_link" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">

Nice try, Evil Edna & 'pals'.

But whatever you say, the words 'equal & opposite' will not change.

I know you want them to...

But they won't.

Ergo: no 'orbital velocity' for you, no matter how much you ridicule me.

So, velocity is a force?

Bijane: Re. your new avatar; google 'facial asymmetry child abuse' for beaucoup lols.

As for your other nonsense; meh.

Learn Newton's 3rd.

Please?

Nice try, Evil Edna & 'pals'.

But whatever you say, the words 'equal & opposite' will not change.

No one is denying the equal and opposite part.  It's how equal and opposite applies to forces vs. velocity that is the point of contention at this point.

     For every action, there is an equal and opposite reaction.

The statement means that in every interaction, there is a pair of forces acting on the two interacting objects. The size of the forces on the first object equals the size of the force on the second object. The direction of the force on the first object is opposite to the direction of the force on the second object. Forces always come in pairs - equal and opposite action-reaction force pairs.

Note how the author is referring to forces, not velocities.

Learn Newton's 3rd.

I have, it applies to forces. Is velocity a force? It's a simple yes or no question.

Markjo: a Lawyer is NOT a Scientist; please learn the difference.

Bijane; LOL!!!

Is the velocity of the shuttle's exhaust 10.000 mph or not?

Cos if it is, then Newton 3 takes care of the rest...

Bye, Jane!