Elon Musk Space X launches person to ISS

The very same unsubstantiated claims come from people like yourself,

Such as?

unless you think Hollywood type films are your evidence as well as made up equations to suit whatever size fantasy rockets are put before the public.

No, the equations are not "made up equations to suit whatever size fantasy rockets" they were carefully derived and suit all sized rockets.

The operation of rockets has been understood for centuries and even the limits of what rockets can do was first shown some 150 years ago.
And "The Tsiolkovsky rocket equation, classical rocket equation, or ideal rocket equation" that defines these limits is about 120 years old.

You're sat there reeling off nothing more than book and picture feed by mimicking.

And do you expect me to waste my time drawing those diagrams and deriving those equation just to be ridiculed by you !
Not plurry likely!

Like conspiracy theorists in general, though far worse than most, you simply justify all your fiction by automatically claiming that all contrary evidence is faked.
But in your case you've got nothing, no evidence nor explanations that really work for anything yet you've got the cheek to riducule everybody else.

Quote from: rabinoz on March 11, 2019, 07:05:53 PM

Quote from: sceptimatic on March 11, 2019, 01:00:13 PM

Don't make out I know nothing about rocket engines while pretending that you do.

I only need to know one thing.
That one thing is as clear as can be.
Rockets can not work in extreme low pressure, never mind fictional space.l

As long as you claim things like "rockets can not work in extreme low pressure" I'll claim that you "know nothing about rocket engines".

Get me Steve!

Here from someone that knows far more about calculating the thrust of a rocket engine that you ever will:

How do you like them apples ?

Look at the (p_e - p_o)A_e term where:
     p_e is the exhaust pressure at the end of the bell,
     p_o is the outside pressure and
     A_e is the area of the exit from the bell.
From that, it is obvious that the thrust is highest in a near vacuum where p_o approaches zero.

Oops, I forgot that you don't believe in sums so forget all that.
But if you are not prepared to do a few sums it is obvious that you "know nothing about rocket engines".

End of story!

I see all the thrust coming out of the rocket against the?....atmosphere. It can't be against nothing.....unless you can show me internally in that rocket where the opposite reaction is to the action from that nozzle.

Come on...once and for all show me. Let's see you point to the places where this reaction to action takes place.

Show me where this push occurs to make that rocket go high into the sky without using the atmosphere as a resistance, externally.

I see you're doing a piss poor job of channelling Papa Legba

FOr scepti's benefit, lets look at a vid of doing a low pressure rocket burn.

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

Cue it to the 10:20 mark

This has morphed into "Intercontinental Ballistic Missile -2.0"

How many pages of typing practice will this one attain?

Quote from: sceptimatic on March 11, 2019, 11:13:57 PM

The very same unsubstantiated claims come from people like yourself,

Such as?

Quote from: sceptimatic

unless you think Hollywood type films are your evidence as well as made up equations to suit whatever size fantasy rockets are put before the public.

No, the equations are not "made up equations to suit whatever size fantasy rockets" they were carefully derived and suit all sized rockets.

The operation of rockets has been understood for centuries and even the limits of what rockets can do was first shown some 150 years ago.
And "The Tsiolkovsky rocket equation, classical rocket equation, or ideal rocket equation" that defines these limits is about 120 years old.

Quote from: sceptimatic

You're sat there reeling off nothing more than book and picture feed by mimicking.

And do you expect me to waste my time drawing those diagrams and deriving those equation just to be ridiculed by you !
Not plurry likely!

Like conspiracy theorists in general, though far worse than most, you simply justify all your fiction by automatically claiming that all contrary evidence is faked.
But in your case you've got nothing, no evidence nor explanations that really work for anything yet you've got the cheek to riducule everybody else.

You could forgive anyone for thinking he might be a troll....

I see you're doing a piss poor job of channelling Papa Legba

I've often suspected that Papa Legba might be sceptimatic's "puppet on a string".
Flat Earth General / Re: Are satellites real? « Message by rabinoz on February 18, 2018, 10:33:41 PM »
Flat Earth Debate / Re: Astronomers have spotted the Tesla with their telescopes. « Message by rabinoz on February 17, 2018, 10:13:06 PM »

Quote from: Themightykabool on March 11, 2019, 09:19:49 PM

Whos steve?

Should I include an Australian Slang to English dictionary ?

Quote from: Green’s Dictionary of Slang

Get me, Steve? (also Got me Steve?)
          (Aus.) are you with me? do you understand?

Further proof australia isnt real.
Haha

Quote from: SkepticMike on March 12, 2019, 01:41:37 AM

I see you're doing a piss poor job of channelling Papa Legba

I've often suspected that Papa Legba might be sceptimatic's "puppet on a string".
Flat Earth General / Re: Are satellites real? « Message by rabinoz on February 18, 2018, 10:33:41 PM »
Flat Earth Debate / Re: Astronomers have spotted the Tesla with their telescopes. « Message by rabinoz on February 17, 2018, 10:13:06 PM »

Scepti = papa?
Impossible.
Looks like papa used a math forumla that involed variables.
Scepti has yet to comprehend the bank math analogy or rate of fall.
He doesnt "math".

Show me where this push occurs to make that rocket go high into the sky without using the atmosphere as a resistance, externally.

There's people out there that believe that?

Try this: first, get on a skate board and throw a trash bag filled with air.
Then repeat except put about 50 to 70 pounds of water in the trash bag, and throw it as hard as you can.

Notice how throwing the large light air-filled bag doesn't move you much, but throwing the smaller heavier water filled bag does move you some?

It's not the atmosphere you're pushing off against buddy, it's the thrust you're imparting to the mass you are throwing.

And that's how rocket engines work in space.

But unless your name is Mark Sargent, you're not alone, there are others like you:
"

Is how I put it forward.
You'll get there.

I notice you completely ignored the issues pointed out, except apparently wanting to use sci-fa as science fact instead of science fantasy.

Now, going to back up your insane claims?
If not, there is no reason for you to be in the debate forum.

I see all the thrust coming out of the rocket against the?....atmosphere. It can't be against nothing

That's right. It isn't against nothing, but it also isn't against the atmosphere. It is against the rocket.

unless you can show me internally in that rocket where the opposite reaction is to the action from that nozzle.
Come on...once and for all show me.

This has been explained to you plenty of times already, so cut the "once and for all" crap. If it is shown/explained again, you will just dismiss it and repeat the same nonsense.

The action-reaction pair is the rocket being pushed one way while the exhaust gasses are pushed the other way.
No need for any air.
This takes place in the same location, as all action-reaction pairs do.

Show me where this push occurs to make that rocket go high into the sky without using the atmosphere as a resistance, externally.

Again, already done countless times.
Show us how the atmosphere is involved.
How does the atmosphere push the rocket?
It can't be from the exhaust below the rocket, that has already left, and has already needed to be accelerated.
Where is the reaction from that accelerating exhaust?

Perhaps you can try explaining what should be happening in a vacuum?
You have the fuel and oxidiser burnt releasing hot pressurised gas.
What happens?
If according to your nonsense you need the air to accelerate objects and you don't want to count this exhaust as air then you are claiming you can have hot pressurised gasses just sitting right next to a vacuum with nothing separating them yet the gas remains there.
Otherwise you have the gas accelerate backwards and the rocket accelerate forwards without any problem.

You can't have it both ways.

Now quit with all the bullshit and topic jumping.
Pick one of your insane baseless claims and either defend it or admit it was a lie.

There have been humans ventured into space I don't dispute that. I dispute the alleged fact that we can get people to dock with a tiny object going more than twice the speed of the current most powerful rail gun projectile. Think about the area that comprises the skies above our planet.

It's not our fault that you can't understand these things. You must have been in contact with Heiwa for too long and caught his dreaded brain lurgie.
The velocity of the ISS is irrelevant as long as it is travelling along a highly predictable orbit.

We will pull it off someday, of that you can be sure.

How do you think new components and astronauts have gone to the ISS over the past 20 years?

Quote from: Shifter on March 04, 2019, 09:06:53 AM

There have been humans ventured into space I don't dispute that. I dispute the alleged fact that we can get people to dock with a tiny object going more than twice the speed of the current most powerful rail gun projectile. Think about the area that comprises the skies above our planet.

It's not our fault that you can't understand these things. You must have been in contact with Heiwa for too long and caught his dreaded brain lurgie.
The velocity of the ISS is irrelevant as long as it is travelling along a highly predictable orbit.

Quote from: Shifter

We will pull it off someday, of that you can be sure.

How do you think new components and astronauts have gone to the ISS over the past 20 years?

What if i told you (shifter) that a man can jump out of an airplane, and then jump back into the same airplane.
Impossible?