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

Quote from: sokarul on November 23, 2015, 06:12:31 AM

Objects can touch each other and still be separate objects.

Great - I get two fireworks for the price of one!

LOL!!!

You do if you buy them in Wyoming.

Lol

A firework is made up of many components. A car is also made up of many components.

i won't let u get away with this.

DRAMA!!!

In breaking news Papa Legba does not accept reality......

Says the man who Lies about everything.

If I'm the shipost king, what does that make you?

As usual, NO U!!! is markjo's best effort.

A firework is made up of many components. A car is also made up of many components.

Oh, now sock-arul rocks up to complete the shill-set.

Still can't tell the difference between the numbers ONE and TWO though...

Sloppy toilet training, idiot?

GTFO, Losers.

Yet again, I'll just leave this here for easy reference & the education of Walter 'mainframes' Mitty:

To every action there is always an equal and opposite reaction: or the forces of two bodies on each other are always equal and are directed in opposite directions.

Quote from: markjo on November 23, 2015, 09:38:57 AM

If I'm the shipost king, what does that make you?

As usual, NO U!!! is markjo's best effort.

It's no worse than your shitspamming.

Quote from: sokarul on November 23, 2015, 10:20:57 AM

A firework is made up of many components. A car is also made up of many components.

Oh, now sock-arul rocks up to complete the shill-set.

Still can't tell the difference between the numbers ONE and TWO though...

1 cardboard tube + 1 propellant charge = 1 firework

Wow.  TWO separate parts to make ONE firework.

Mind blown.

Quote from: tomfi on November 23, 2015, 08:53:34 AM

i won't let u get away with this.

DRAMA!!!

Quote from: Walter MItty on November 23, 2015, 09:15:20 AM

In breaking news Papa Legba does not accept reality......

Says the man who Lies about everything.

Quote from: markjo on November 23, 2015, 09:38:57 AM

If I'm the shipost king, what does that make you?

As usual, NO U!!! is markjo's best effort.

Quote from: sokarul on November 23, 2015, 10:20:57 AM

A firework is made up of many components. A car is also made up of many components.

Oh, now sock-arul rocks up to complete the shill-set.

Still can't tell the difference between the numbers ONE and TWO though...

Sloppy toilet training, idiot?

GTFO, Losers.

U find satisfying  insulting random People on internet?
It's because u cannot accept that there are smarter people than u out there?
Dear papa, call one of your welder buddy and tell him how intelligent u are, how u've invented new laws of physics, how u can explain everything without knowing math , otherwise u'll end up crying in the shower like a little girl tonight

FYI i won't GTFO from this thread honey, you know what, i should find u a new name petulant child, i should call u Cindy from now on.

FYI u apply 3rd law considering a couple of bodies, but u can applied it easily to multibody systems by simply diving your system in subsystems. Example, petrol engines, action reaction between the piston and the ignited air-fuel mixture, action-reaction conrod-piston, action reaction conrod-crankshaft

ONE firework.

Exactly: ONE object.

Idiot.

U find satisfying  insulting random People on internet?

'U find satisfying' Lying to random people on internet for a living?

Just to remind all you psychopaths:

A rocket is ONE object.

So how, when it ignites its exhaust & becomes ONE object creating an action, thus fulfilling the dictates of Newton's 2nd Law only, does it somehow become TWO objects in order to fulfil the dictates of Newton's 3rd Law?

Remember this?

To every action there is always an equal and opposite reaction: or the forces of two bodies on each other are always equal and are directed in opposite directions.

Now; Carry On Lying!

Just to remind all you psychopaths:

A rocket is ONE object.

So how, when it ignites its exhaust & becomes ONE object creating an action, thus fulfilling the dictates of Newton's 2nd Law only, does it somehow become TWO objects in order to fulfil the dictates of Newton's 3rd Law?

Remember this?

Quote from: tomfi on November 23, 2015, 01:20:20 AM

To every action there is always an equal and opposite reaction: or the forces of two bodies on each other are always equal and are directed in opposite directions.

Now; Carry On Lying!

One object u say.... No problem.

Since nothing is acting on a rocket in vacuum,  the center of mass should not move right?
No force, no acceleration, center of mass in the same position.
So when gasses are ejected from the nozzle, part of the mass of the rocket is going in one direction and, in order to have the center of mass still in the same position, the other part of the mass should move in the opposite direction. So gasses go in one direction and rocket goes in the other, they're still one object and its center of mass should not move since in vacuum u have no force acting on it.

See i can make the rocket move considering it one object, without mentioning 3rd law and without an atmosphere.

Don't know what u think about gravity, just to be safe consider the rocket millions of light years away from everything else, in this case u basically have no gravity and there aren't any forces acting on the rocket

Yet again, I'll just leave this here for easy reference & the education of Walter 'mainframes' Mitty:

Quote from: tomfi on November 23, 2015, 01:20:20 AM

To every action there is always an equal and opposite reaction: or the forces of two bodies on each other are always equal and are directed in opposite directions.

They don't have to touch each other......

It really, truly, can NOT be emphasised strongly enough that I DO NOT SPEAK GIBBERISH!

Okay?

For example:

So gasses go in one direction and rocket goes in the other, they're still one object...

GTFO, lunatic.

Quote from: Papa Legba on November 23, 2015, 10:31:40 AM

Yet again, I'll just leave this here for easy reference & the education of Walter 'mainframes' Mitty:

Quote from: tomfi on November 23, 2015, 01:20:20 AM

To every action there is always an equal and opposite reaction: or the forces of two bodies on each other are always equal and are directed in opposite directions.

They don't have to touch each other......

Making up the Laws of Physics as you go now?

Nothing new there eh, Walter Mitty?

Quote from: markjo on November 23, 2015, 10:41:57 AM

ONE firework.

Exactly: ONE object.

Made up of 2 objects.

Someone claiming to work in construction should be familiar with that concept.

You know, using smaller objects to make one big object.

How many objects does it take to make 1 house?

Idiot.

How mature.

Reductio ad absurdum; is that your best shitpost tactic now?

What a Loser.

First of all
Haisfracassatolaminchiacoltuogibberishdelcazzo.

That's proper gibberish.


So Cindy..... Gasses being ejected by the rocket are a different object than the rocket?
Cause in that case gasses are being ejected cause they are accelerated by the nozzle.
 Gasses have a mass.
Mass*acceleration is a force.
 So the nozzle is producing a force on the gasses and it's receiving an equal and opposite force from them.

Look, it's what the MIT professor has been saying.
Oh god, never expected he was right

Reductio ad absurdum;

  What's absurd about one rocket being made up of a number of different objects? 

BTW, reductio ad absurdum, in and of itself, is not necessarily a fallacy, but it can be useful in pointing out the fallacy in your arugument.

It's obvious papa legba is just trolling the fuck out of you dumbshits. 199 pages of bite after bite.

Underneath all the trolls/insults he seems well educated and is probably just here to have some fun.

What makes u think i'm not Here for fun as well?
I've seen better trolls btw. Too aggressive, pages of insults and no real substance.
I don't think is that well educated. If he really is he should put a little more effort. Reminds me of thebigone

Newton's 3rd Law specifically speaks of the interaction of TWO objects.

Look:

To every action there is always an equal and opposite reaction: or the forces of two bodies on each other are always equal and are directed in opposite directions.

So; the sooner all you shitposting psychopaths decide how many objects a rocket in fact consists of (lol it's one!), the sooner we can begin discussing how it works.

Of course, everyone who is not a Paid Liar or Bedrock Madman already knows they push against the medium upon which they move - like every other thing on Earth that moves does  - but let's have some Fun with Sociopaths first, eh?

In which case; Carry On Lying!

So; the sooner all you shitposting psychopaths decide how many objects a rocket in fact consists of (lol it's one!), the sooner we can begin discussing how it works.

A rocket consists of many parts, but the 2 relevant ones are the combustion chamber and the fuel/oxidizer mix that is burned to produce combustion gasses which are accelerated out the back end.

Quote from: Mainframes on November 23, 2015, 11:53:07 AM

They don't have to touch each other......

Making up the Laws of Physics as you go now?

Nothing new there eh, Walter Mitty?

Magnets don't touch each and they exert force on each other.

A rocket consists of many parts, but the 2 relevant ones

Oh, no, no, no...

Is it MANY?

Or is it TWO?

Magnets don't touch each and they exert force on each other.

So rockets work by magnetism now?

Okay; just to humour you...

Do rockets consist of:

ONE magnet?

TWO magnets?

MANY magnets?

The number of Objects (magnetic or otherwise) from which a rocket is constituted is of Vital Importance here, psychotic Raown Derfers...

Can we at least get a consensus before moving on?

Is that too much to ask from Rational, Logical & Upright Men of Science such as your not-at-all disinfo-shill selves?

What makes u think i'm not Here for fun as well?
I've seen better trolls btw. Too aggressive, pages of insults and no real substance.
I don't think is that well educated. If he really is he should put a little more effort. Reminds me of thebigone

Not too agressive at all, just the right amount in fact, he's obviously getting under everyone's skin and that's just what he wants.

In fact I don't think Papa Legba gives a flying fuck about what is being discussed, he just wants to watch people squirm and he seems to be a doing a hell of a job lol

Of course he's smart, how else could he convince you all that he believes rockets aren't real.

If you guys haven't figured out yet that he is just playing devil's advocate to wind you all up then you're the ones with the problem not him lol.

Quote from: markjo on November 23, 2015, 01:04:27 PM

A rocket consists of many parts, but the 2 relevant ones

Oh, no, no, no...

Is it MANY?

Or is it TWO?

Yes.

Many parts make up a rocket, but 2 are most relevant when discussing why they don't need to push off an atmosphere.

Apparently context is yet another concept with which Papa Legba is not familiar.

Quote from: markjo on November 23, 2015, 01:04:27 PM

A rocket consists of many parts, but the 2 relevant ones

Oh, no, no, no...

Is it MANY?

Or is it TWO?

Quote from: Walter Mitty on November 23, 2015, 01:07:03 PM

Magnets don't touch each and they exert force on each other.

So rockets work by magnetism now?

Okay; just to humour you...

Do rockets consist of:

ONE magnet?

TWO magnets?

MANY magnets?

The number of Objects (magnetic or otherwise) from which a rocket is constituted is of Vital Importance here, psychotic Raown Derfers...

Can we at least get a consensus before moving on?

Is that too much to ask from Rational, Logical & Upright Men of Science such as your not-at-all disinfo-shill selves?

I didn't say magnets had anything to do with rockets.

Anyway nice to see you are being deliberately obtuse about everything again.

A rocket is composed of many objects but can be simplified to one because of continuum mechanics.
The exhaust then becomes a sepsrate object after it has interacted with the rocket.

Be nice to get back to the topic
The OP contained "Anyone that grew up through the 40's, 50's and 60's were literally bombarded with promises of space travel, flying cars, shopping malls in space, you name it. With billions of planets to choose from the universe was all of a sudden a much bigger place."
I just wonder people with that idea got their information from?  The nearest place I can find back there was first of all Flash Gordon and then the Jetsons.  I don't think NASA made it sound easy - what the number of rockets that:
Exploded on the launch pad,
Simply became unstable and crashed back close by (watch you head!),
Lost guidance at high altitude and were made to self-destruct
or simply disappeared.
This does not include the numerous engine failures on the test-bed. 
No, it's never been easy, of course not helped by the US approach of taking the lowest tender - I probably do them an injustice there, but you get the idea.
We can't really blame Wernher von Braun for all this but:
Gather 'round while I sing you of Wernher von Braun,
"Once the rockets are up, who cares where they come down?
That's not my department," says Wernher von Braun.
                                                                         Tom Lehrer

What topic?  This thread was started by a retarded based on his retatdedness. "Rockets push of the atmosphere", how stupid can one be?

I actually think the threads true origin is from the disappointment that its still not easy to get into space.

Although the topic

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

is not correct, we are all closer to getting into space, the price of sending a kg up has more than halved in the last 5 years and should half at least once more in the next 5, this is all excluding inflation. Real world rockets are getting cheaper relative to everything else.

Thing is, rockets where unfathomably expensive back then, now they are only ridiculously expensive. The Flat Earth Society dies when they become only exceptionally expensive

Many parts make up a rocket

You use the phrase 'A rocket'; does this not give you a clue as to how many objects 'A rocket' in fact is?

What with it being a Singular Noun and all?

This thread was started by a retarded based on his retatdedness.

If you're going to accuse someone of retardedness you should at least learn how to spell it.

A rocket is composed of many objects but can be simplified to one because of continuum mechanics.

Oh, look - I taught you a New Word!

And you're already mis-applying it...

Strange, cos if you had a degree in Chem. Eng. you would be very unlikely to do so.

LOL!!!

Real world rockets are getting cheaper relative to everything else.

Yes; the costs of CGI are indeed getting cheaper.

*Yawn!*

Now; back to the fun and games: How many Objects is A Rocket (singular noun)?

I count ONE; yet you shpayze-tards seem somewhat visually impaired.

Do let us know how the Magic happens & your Rocket miraculously transforms from Singular to Plural in order to get to 'shpaaayzhhe'!

I find it fascinating how half a dozen more or less intelligent people desperately try to talk sense to a bully who doesn't care for content at all but is just flinging poo in every direction and delights in the attention he gets through that ...

... I hate to tell you all, but PL is the only winner in this thread.

I find it fascinating how half a dozen more or less intelligent people

The operative word in the above phrase is 'Less'.

Because forget 'half a dozen'; if half a BILLION people less intelligent than I tried to tell me that ONE Object is in fact TWO, or MANY, or whatever amount of Objects they need to sustain their ludicrous & fraudulent sci-fi fantasies, I'd still laugh in their faces.

Oh, & p.s: anonymous internet sock-puppet entities don't really count as 'people'.

So stop pretending they do, psycho.

Yet again, I'll just leave this here for easy reference & the education of Walter 'mainframes' Mitty:

To every action there is always an equal and opposite reaction: or the forces of two bodies on each other are always equal and are directed in opposite directions.