Recent Posts

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 10
1
s:

Rocket throws mass out the back, rocket goes forward.  An equal and opposite reaction.  That’s really all you need to know to get the principle.
Throws mass out of the back, how?

And throwing anything against zero resistance will not push a rocket forward. It just won't.
Allowing mass to compress the atmosphere will create an equal reaction to that mass. This includes your rocket burn expand out of being compressed inside a rocket to compressing the atmosphere it expands into.

A rocket burn cannot do anything against extreme minimal resistance.

Scepti, that was for the new poster, so he/she doesn’t have to read through 100 pages of people trying to explain it to you.

I know you won’t accept it, but Hatty might not reject basically all of physics like you.
2
Flat Earth General / Re: Are these forums controlled opposition?
« Last post by rvlvr on Today at 07:11:06 AM »
it was only when the first men went to the moon it was decided the Earth was globular with broad scientific consensus.
While it is true I was born after said flight, I find it really difficult to believe that.
3
Flat Earth General / Re: About spinning and gravity
« Last post by HattyFatner on Today at 07:10:00 AM »
A tidal wave
A sea of words
Capitulations
Reservations
Broad strokes
To make you chock
On an endless joke
4
Nowhere in my thermodynamics texts does it state that you can’t propel and object in space.  I’ve seen such a claim from the field of Thermodynamics (which I did study, btw).

Is it stated anywhere in your texts that this is possible? I never heard that before. Because two opposing pressures is key to thermodynamics working at all isn't it?

There are pressure changes going from the combustion chamber to the exhaust plume.  Not to mention in subsystems like the turbo pumps on the fuel and oxidant lines.

My books don’t explicitly state that rockets work in a vacuum, possibly because they were written long before flat earthers starting claiming they didn’t. 

It just doesn’t need saying because the physics of thermodynamics is perfectly compatible with rockets working in space.  Same with all the other engineering subjects.  You can look at the fluid flow, the heat transfers, the basic laws of motion, and it’s all just fine.

You might have missed it on the 100+ pages before you joined, but in the simplest terms:

Rocket throws mass out the back, rocket goes forward.  An equal and opposite reaction.  That’s really all you need to know to get the principle.

The pressure changes need to be opposing from an exterior and interior system to create thrust in the body of the vehicle. Is how I understand it.

Is it your website? I'm curious why you removed the moon hoax pages.

Flat earther's did not claim you can't create thrust in a vacuum, that was the scientific consensus up until the moon landing proved them wrong. Not my words, the words of https://www.physicsclassroom.com/class/newtlaws/Lesson-4/Newton-s-Third-Law

You mean the “Check your Understanding” question:


2. For years, space travel was believed to be impossible because there was nothing that rockets could push off of in space in order to provide the propulsion necessary to accelerate. This inability of a rocket to provide propulsion is because ...

a. ... space is void of air so the rockets have nothing to push off of.

b. ... gravity is absent in space.

c. ... space is void of air and so there is no air resistance in space.

d. ... nonsense! Rockets do accelerate in space and have been able to do so for a long time.

If you click on the “see answer” button, you’ll discover the answer is d: nonsense!

Not a great citation for your argument.
5
Flat Earth General / Re: Are these forums controlled opposition?
« Last post by HattyFatner on Today at 07:05:20 AM »
You should see a similar temperature difference.  Let us know if you don’t.
I don't have the apparatus for that kind of experiment but I'd be interested to see the results if anyone did it.
6
Flat Earth General / Re: Are these forums controlled opposition?
« Last post by HattyFatner on Today at 07:03:33 AM »
Or, all the FEers will be silenced due to their inability to rationally defend their claims.

This comment proves you don't have any intention of actually debating anything scientifically. You have just dismissed anyone who holds that view completely out of hand.

No one can debate with you if that is your attitude.

So these forums are pretty much a complete waste of time for anyone with a genuine interesting in discussing science.
7
Feel free to perform it yourself.

I see you suck at chemistry and physics.

My offer is still open $200 an hour. Just let me know.
8
Please stop posting the gif of that idiot on a trolley. That is in no way an acceptable scientific experiment. You can clearly see him rocking himself backwards.

Look carefully. At the point the ball is released, no motion is in effect. Then he rocks his body and low and behold he rolls back a bit. I mean. Wow. Just. Wow.

How do you account for the pause in motion before the 2 distinct slight movements that follow shortly afterwards?

You could do that experiment with a spring, a catch and a pool ball. All that will happen is the trolley containing the spring and ball will shift to the amount the center of the combined weight of the ball and aparatus is moved by the spring up until the point the ball is no longer affecting the apparatus by it's contact at which point the apparatus will come to a halt.

Try it and record it because I an't be bothered. I don't think I can do any more here.
9
Yes. That doesn't mean it creates oxygen. You can pay me $200 an hour to tutor you or you can just keep following the links in wikipedia until you understand.
I'll take Wikipedia please. Even though it revised it's flat earth page in the region of 10,000 times. That's a genuine estimate by the way. Check out how many revisions there are. Also, it changed the revision history because the article is completely different to when I read it 5 years ago. And I mean it is utterly different. No-one on the internet was saying global earth theory was accepted even before the 1940's until about 5 years ago when history was revised again.
10
Not true.
Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 10