A little science experiment - round earth

Quote from: Ravenwood240 on February 24, 2009, 12:33:05 PM

In this post: zork on Today at 13:48:50, you said, and I quote:  "I just said that it shows that unmanned space flight is possible."

That is the point I have been trying to make to you.  It doesn't prove shit.  Go back to your own posts, read what you wrote again.  You claimed that it proved unmanned space flight was possible.  Now, back that claim up, or shut the F*** up.

You just quoted what I said and I said "showed" not "proved". And I still stand by it that if they are successful about their project and can send rocket up to space, then it clearly shows that unmanned space flight is possible. So, their potential launch window is in summer 2009 and we can wait till then.

Quote from: Ravenwood240 on February 24, 2009, 12:33:05 PM

And, by the way, how is this:

"No number of people playing with lighter than air flight shows you anything about heavier than air flight.

Go and read their web site. Ohh, sorry, you can't do that. Suppose I must do copy/paste from there.

The Nova project is to launch balloons to about 30km altitude, carrying small payloads and prototypes for the Martlet rocket launch platform.
The aim of the Martlet Project is to develop a small sounding rocket system that will be launched from a helium balloon at around 30km altitude. The rocket will have a maximum apogee of around 150km, taking it past the official boundary boundary of space that is set at 100km.

OK... now I see where we have crossed signals.  The FE doesn't say that you can't send a rocket up.  It says "A: Since sustained spaceflight is not possible, satellites can't orbit the Earth.  The signals we supposedly receive from them are either broadcast from towers or any number of possible pseudolites. However, temporary space-flight is possible."

That is taken from the FAQ.

They can throw a rocket up there that will come back down... true.

Sustaining that flight, that is impossible by the FE model.  I thought you were claiming that sustained space flight was proved by their attempts.  My apologies.

Sustaining that flight, that is impossible by the FE model.  I thought you were claiming that sustained space flight was proved by their attempts.  My apologies.

I just thought that there is something that we look differently at. And there was. But I can't resist now when you brought it up and ask(not from you specifically and because FAQ doesn't mention that) - why is it impossible? Just because it is?

Well a rocket can only apply a certain amount of thrust. The balloon will continue to rise as long as their is gravity, strong gravity helps lighter than air travel gain more "thrust" as the denser air pushes it up with more force. A rocket is throwing objects out the back to gain speed, the lighter than air is just being pushed up by the particles of the air. So yes, they do work on different principles.

Quote

That doesn't look like a spotlight to me.

That's funny, it looks like the distant boundaries of a circular area of light to me.

Circular, like er um a ball!

Well a rocket can only apply a certain amount of thrust. The balloon will continue to rise as long as their is gravity, strong gravity helps lighter than air travel gain more "thrust" as the denser air pushes it up with more force. A rocket is throwing objects out the back to gain speed, the lighter than air is just being pushed up by the particles of the air. So yes, they do work on different principles.

So sustained space flight is possible with balloons?

Quote from: Raist on February 24, 2009, 10:18:06 PM

Well a rocket can only apply a certain amount of thrust. The balloon will continue to rise as long as their is gravity, strong gravity helps lighter than air travel gain more "thrust" as the denser air pushes it up with more force. A rocket is throwing objects out the back to gain speed, the lighter than air is just being pushed up by the particles of the air. So yes, they do work on different principles.

So sustained space flight is possible with balloons?

Not any more than it is on a round earth, but thank you for agreeing stratellites are possible. This is a good day for FE.

Quote from: user99 on February 25, 2009, 04:33:24 AM

Quote from: Raist on February 24, 2009, 10:18:06 PM

Well a rocket can only apply a certain amount of thrust. The balloon will continue to rise as long as their is gravity, strong gravity helps lighter than air travel gain more "thrust" as the denser air pushes it up with more force. A rocket is throwing objects out the back to gain speed, the lighter than air is just being pushed up by the particles of the air. So yes, they do work on different principles.

So sustained space flight is possible with balloons?

Not any more than it is on a round earth, but thank you for agreeing stratellites are possible. This is a good day for FE.

Where did I do that? Jumped the gun a bit there haven't we?

Quote from: Raist on February 25, 2009, 08:29:03 AM

Quote from: user99 on February 25, 2009, 04:33:24 AM

Quote from: Raist on February 24, 2009, 10:18:06 PM

Well a rocket can only apply a certain amount of thrust. The balloon will continue to rise as long as their is gravity, strong gravity helps lighter than air travel gain more "thrust" as the denser air pushes it up with more force. A rocket is throwing objects out the back to gain speed, the lighter than air is just being pushed up by the particles of the air. So yes, they do work on different principles.

So sustained space flight is possible with balloons?

Not any more than it is on a round earth, but thank you for agreeing stratellites are possible. This is a good day for FE.

Where did I do that? Jumped the gun a bit there haven't we?

If sustained space flight is possible by balloon then stratellites would also be possible. Another victory for FE. Thanks for playing. Have a nice day.

Though balloons do not work in space, they are much heavier than the near vacuum up there. So no space flight isn't possible.

If sustained space flight is possible by balloon then stratellites would also be possible. Another victory for FE. Thanks for playing. Have a nice day.

Noone ever said stratellites are impossible. As a solution to GPS / satellite comms etc they are impractical and financially impossible. They would also be visible.

Though balloons do not work in space, they are much heavier than the near vacuum up there. So no space flight isn't possible.

How do you know space is a near vacuum?

It's not a vacuum.

It's not a vacuum.

Yes it is.  It's just not a perfect vacuum.

Outer space has very low density and pressure, and is the closest physical approximation of a perfect vacuum. It has effectively no friction, allowing stars, planets and moons to move freely along ideal gravitational trajectories. But no vacuum is truly perfect, not even in interstellar space where there are still a few hydrogen atoms per cubic centimeter.

Another victory for FE. Thanks for playing. Have a nice day.

Another?

Quote from: Raist on February 25, 2009, 09:18:12 AM

Another victory for FE. Thanks for playing. Have a nice day.

Another?

Raist is making a huge assumption that there has actually ever been a victory for FE.

I'd like to see it, although I know it's impossible.

Quote from: Vladtheimpaler on February 25, 2009, 12:42:50 PM

Quote from: Raist on February 25, 2009, 09:18:12 AM

Another victory for FE. Thanks for playing. Have a nice day.

Another?

Raist is making a huge assumption that there has actually ever been a victory for FE.

I'd like to see it, although I know it's impossible.

Just because a lot of RE'ers (noobs) around here are losers doesn't mean that FE wins.

Quote from: Raist on February 24, 2009, 10:18:06 PM

Well a rocket can only apply a certain amount of thrust. The balloon will continue to rise as long as their is gravity, strong gravity helps lighter than air travel gain more "thrust" as the denser air pushes it up with more force. A rocket is throwing objects out the back to gain speed, the lighter than air is just being pushed up by the particles of the air. So yes, they do work on different principles.

Though balloons do not work in space, they are much heavier than the near vacuum up there. So no space flight isn't possible.

  I quite didn't got the part where you explain why sustained space flight is impossible. Except for balloons case. I don't buy the explanation that sustained space flight is impossible because - rocket is throwing objects out the back to gain speed, the lighter than air is just being pushed up by the particles of the air.
What argument is that? It doesn't explain anything.

It's not a vacuum.

You didn't answer my question.

How do you know space is a near vacuum?

Lurk more. Fail less.

Tom Bishop never posted like this.
I want the real Tom Bishop back.

Quote from: Tom Bishop on February 24, 2009, 10:34:14 AM

Lurk more. Fail less.

Tom Bishop never posted like this.
I want the real Tom Bishop back.

I suspect its a shared account.

Quote from: unclegravy on February 25, 2009, 05:04:46 PM

Quote from: Tom Bishop on February 24, 2009, 10:34:14 AM

Lurk more. Fail less.

Tom Bishop never posted like this.
I want the real Tom Bishop back.

I suspect its a shared account.

this is Tom 2.0. He was upgraded with additional sarcasm units, and decreased fail rates.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spaceflight

Hmm...

...I could swear that the earth looks round in that picture.



Wait, lemme guess.

"IT'S DOCTORED!!!"

Quote from: Ravenwood240 on February 24, 2009, 12:09:40 PM

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spaceflight

Hmm...

...I could swear that the earth looks round in that picture.



Wait, lemme guess.

"IT'S DOCTORED!!!"

Sigh.  Of course it is.  With the easy availability of photo shopping software, no picture can be trusted.

Sustained space flight is not possible because of the UA.

Engy and a couple of other can explain it better than I can, as I am not conversant with the math.

I'm working on it, but I do have a life.

Search "sustained space flight, UA" and that should lead you to a thread or six that will give you the current explanations.

Sustained space flight is not possible because of the UA.

And yet satellites, rockets, orbiters, space shuttles etc all continue to exist and function as definined.

Quote from: Ravenwood240 on February 26, 2009, 08:05:14 AM

Sustained space flight is not possible because of the UA.

And yet satellites, rockets, orbiters, space shuttles etc all continue to exist and function as definined.

Really?  You, yourself have been on all of those flights and can, by personal experience prove that they have all gone into space beyond the LEO and done what NASA and the other space agencies said?

You assume that they do what you've been told they do.

You don't know that they do.

Really?  You, yourself have been on all of those flights and can, by personal experience prove that they have all gone into space beyond the LEO and done what NASA and the other space agencies said?

You assume that they do what you've been told they do.

You don't know that they do.

It's not a requirement that I be on every space flight. It's a fallacy to suggest that in order for something to be true, it has to be personally experienced by the debater.

(For if only the debater has experienced it, is it still true for all those who didn't experience it? If not, how can something be true for one person, but not for another? We are left with the startling conclusion that for something to be true it needs to be experienced by all mankind. I don't know about you, but I like my me time)

Once one rocket flies, we know, a priori, that all rockets can/will fly, and more crucially, that all satellites / space shuttles are able to orbit the earth.

It's only a requirement that I (if it's my inclination) disprove what NASA claim to be doing.

Quote from: Ravenwood240 on February 26, 2009, 08:12:34 AM

Really?  You, yourself have been on all of those flights and can, by personal experience prove that they have all gone into space beyond the LEO and done what NASA and the other space agencies said?

You assume that they do what you've been told they do.

You don't know that they do.

It's not a requirement that I be on every space flight. It's a fallacy to suggest that in order for something to be true, it has to be personally experienced by the debater.

(For if only the debater has experienced it, is it still true for all those who didn't experience it? If not, how can something be true for one person, but not for another? We are left with the startling conclusion that for something to be true it needs to be experienced by all mankind. I don't know about you, but I like my me time)

Once one rocket flies, we know, a priori, that all rockets can/will fly, and more crucially, that all satellites / space shuttles are able to orbit the earth.

It's only a requirement that I (if it's my inclination) disprove what NASA claim to be doing.

You only know what NASA tells you.  They claim to have made rockets fly.  Have you any evidence that did not come from NASA and proves sustained space flight?

By NASA, I am including all space agencies.  It doesn't matter what country they are from.

Have you any evidence that did not come from NASA and proves sustained space flight?

Oh dear lord.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Johannes_Kepler

He predates NASA by about 400 years.

Quote

It's not a requirement that I be on every space flight. It's a fallacy to suggest that in order for something to be true, it has to be personally experienced by the debater.

That's a shame, because the entire FE argument is that none of us have been into space, therefore it isn't possible. Sadly nobody else on here has been in my house, damn - that must meen it doesn't exist! Wait, does that also mean I don't exist, since nobody on here has met me - OMG! The weakness and continous failure of FE is causing a rift in space-time continuum.

I can, however, interact with you, by the means of this board.

I type something, you respond to it and then I respond again.

Due to this, I have a working hypothesis that you are a sentient being of some sort.  By my own experience, you have a domicile of some sort.  Most earth based sentient beings call that domicile a house or home.

Therefore, in the absence of any other data, I can assume that you exist and have a house.

Now, I cannot, by the experience that I have had with you at this point, prove if you are male, female, nor can I prove your race, shape or eye colour, but you are a being.

Quote from: Ravenwood240 on February 26, 2009, 08:50:58 AM

Have you any evidence that did not come from NASA and proves sustained space flight?

Oh dear lord.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Johannes_Kepler

He predates NASA by about 400 years.

How does a man dead centuries before we had rockets prove sustained space flight?

Quote from: user99 on February 26, 2009, 09:00:40 AM

Quote from: Ravenwood240 on February 26, 2009, 08:50:58 AM

Have you any evidence that did not come from NASA and proves sustained space flight?

Oh dear lord.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Johannes_Kepler

He predates NASA by about 400 years.

How does a man dead centuries before we had rockets prove sustained space flight?

*grabs Ravens head, twists it to the moon*

Look. Moon. Go round earth. Moon do that why not man. Man put thing near moon. Man do like moon. Go round earth. Man need get near Moon. Man make rocket now.

Quote from: Ravenwood240 on February 26, 2009, 09:05:56 AM

Quote from: user99 on February 26, 2009, 09:00:40 AM

Quote from: Ravenwood240 on February 26, 2009, 08:50:58 AM

Have you any evidence that did not come from NASA and proves sustained space flight?

Oh dear lord.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Johannes_Kepler

He predates NASA by about 400 years.

How does a man dead centuries before we had rockets prove sustained space flight?

*grabs Ravens head, twists it to the moon*

Look. Moon. Go round earth. Moon do that why not man. Man put thing near moon. Man do like moon. Go round earth. Man need get near Moon. Man make rocket now.

Have you even looked at the FAQ?  How can you debate anything if you don't understand at least the basics of both sides?

Pay attention.  The presence of the moon in the sky doesn't mean that rockets will get there.  Nothing that was created by Kepler or any other man dead before we built rockets can be more than a theory.

Now, since you're so certain that you can prove it, do it.