As you like analogies, here is one for you:
You are in a swimming pool, near the wall (so it is within reach), and you want to get away from the wall.
Do you A - Push away from the wall, i.e. stretching your arms/feet out away from the wall and applying a force in the direction away from the wall, or
B - Push towards the wall, i.e. stretching your arms/feet out towards the wall, possibly even pushing into the wall.
That's not how mine works. This is why you're getting yourself mixed up.
Really?
So when you are in a swimming pool, if you push your arms forwards, you push forwards?
I'll put your analogy right from my side.
You mean you will avoid yet another very simple question which shows your model to be a pile of nonsense.
How about you stop with all the nonsense and try to answer these very simple questions.
Push against the wall to move away from it, or do you push in the opposite direction?
At the front a massive hole opens up and out goes the first person who simply decompresses because that wall is not there anymore to keep the person compressed.
Nope. You can't just simply move like that.
You need something to make you move. So what does?
What force is there to make the person move?
I'm showing that rockets do not work as we are told and certainly do not work in a so called space vacuum.
You are only showing your complete inability to very simple questions which show you are completely wrong.
You have been completely unable to show a single problem with the currently accepted model.
All you have provided to try to show that rockets can't work in space is your delusional model built upon wild speculation with absolutely no supporting evidence and mountains of contradictions in the model.
So no, you are not showing the rockets don't work in a vacuum.
You aren't even coming close.
If you want to have any chance of doing so, you need to be able to answer these very simple questions:
What is the gas pushing against to allow it to move?
How does the gas magically know to stop pushing outwards in all directions and instead only push towards the opening?
How does the gas move towards the opening if it is pushing towards it, meaning it would be pushed away?
Until you answer them, you have nothing and have no chance at all of refuting the reality of rockets working in a vacuum.
What is the gas pushing against to allow it to move?
Gas.
Again, that means the gas is capable of providing resistance to motion and thus the rocket can push off it as well.
That means rockets work in space.
How does the gas magically know to stop pushing outwards in all directions and instead only push towards the opening?
Decompression.
That is a useless word, not an answer.
How does it know to only push towards the front. What mechanism is there?
The only sane thing to happen is for the gas to continue to push outwards in ALL directions.
You need to provide a justification for why it only pushes in one direction.
How does the gas move towards the opening if it is pushing towards it, meaning it would be pushed away?
It's expanding against a weaker compressive force in the opposite direction (atmosphere).
If it was just expanding, it would expand outwards in all directions, not magically move in one direction. So again, you have no answer.
This also completely ignores the actual issue, how does it actually move forwards if it is pushing forwards.
The only way for it to move forwards is for it to push backwards so a reactionary force pushes it forwards.
What I do see is a failure of you and others to understand what I put forward.
Stop with the insults.
We understand quite well.
We just realise that it is pure nonsense.
Realising your nonsense is nonsense doesn't mean we don't understand.
Pointing out your contradictions doesn't mean we don't understand.
You repeatedly telling us we don't understand rather than actually addressing the issues is far indicative of you not being able to defend your model at all, and us almost certainly being correct that your model is a pile of self-contradictory garbage.
The positive force is now expanding out into the opening and releasing the push against the walls, negatively.
i.e. it is still applying a pressure, it is just less than before.
You seem to be using a completely different meaning of the word.
How about this analogy:
Someone is pushing you against a wall, applying a significant force.
Then they slowly ease up on the force, gradually reducing the force they are applying to you.
Are they still pushing you?
The actual containers and external atmospheric pressure are the deciding factors.
Only if there are interactions between the container and the air due to them pushing against each other.