Black Holes and Rockets in Space

the op missed a 4th type for people like himself,iwantobelieve,hoppy and iwitness.

it looks like a black hole. the description is in the name.

yes thats correct

i dont think you can see black holes

they are observed from what i heard, not seen.

i have heard people say that the effects of a black hole are observed. in other words the effects have been seen.

 If I observe a woman getting undressed, I see her getting undressed.

you got more chance of observing a black hole.

technically that could be the same thing

Quote from: squevil on November 17, 2012, 11:49:11 AM

technically that could be the same thing

So basically a black hole is the figment of scientists minds. That's basically it isn't it.

you are quoting me out of context. im not going to explain the joke.

im partially with you on this one. its not a figment and observations suggest something is there, but from my understanding its just a calculated guess. but im not going to just dismiss their data because its beyond my comprehension, something you appear to do.

when ever i see anything about what goes on outside of the solar system i find it hard to grasp the concepts and how people come to such conclusions. however i accept that they are the experts in the field and i would rather listen to them, rather than make my own theories because it sounds better to me.

Newtons law working in the vacuum of space is a classic case of how people can be brainwashed into believing rockets work better. That's fine though, it just doesn't happen to convince me.

And how is it that Newton's law doesn't work in vacuum?
About black holes, I'll try to explain. Black holes are theoretical solution to the Einstein equations that contain a singularity in the center and an event horizon, below which nothing can be seen (this is a simple Schwarzchild black hole, no rotation and no charge). What we see from telescopes that constitutes strong evidence (not complete proof) for a black hole is this: we see a disk of matter going at high speeds, but apparently there's no mass for this disk to be orbiting. Furthermore, it emits high energy radiation. A black hole provides explanation for all of these. If there's a black hole, you wouldn't be able to see it, but they have mass so the disk of matter can orbit around it; not only that, but the matter will fall into the black hole, emitting the radiation we see. So, even if this disk of matter orbiting nothing is not a definite proof of black holes, it's a very strong evidence for their existence.

Quote

Newtons law working in the vacuum of space is a classic case of how people can be brainwashed into believing rockets work better. That's fine though, it just doesn't happen to convince me.

And how is it that Newton's law doesn't work in vacuum?

Who says that Newton's laws don't work in a vacuum?

Quote from: markjo on November 17, 2012, 05:23:23 PM

Quote from: spaceman spiff on November 17, 2012, 02:54:51 PM

Quote

Newtons law working in the vacuum of space is a classic case of how people can be brainwashed into believing rockets work better. That's fine though, it just doesn't happen to convince me.

And how is it that Newton's law doesn't work in vacuum?

Who says that Newton's laws don't work in a vacuum?

I do.

And you say that friction with the air is required to make Newton's laws work. Wonder why we do not care about what you think?

Throwing a very heavy ball away from you will naturally overcome the air friction quite easily and will have minimal effect in pushing you away and this is where gravity and the mass of the ball come into play.

Demonstrate this. Do an experiment, and see if your predictions agree with the result of your own experiment.

You are telling us the result of experiments all the time, without even having the common decency to do the actual experiment, or otherwise giving a reason for your magical knowledge of the result of an experiment.

You are getting from this forum a sizable amount of information so you can do your own experiments and demonstrate to yourself how there is more to Science than you want to see. It is your responsibility with yourself to get out of your idea that if it sounds right to an Average Joe it has to be right.

There is one such thing as extrapolation. It is not a weird thing that only strange scientists in lab coats can do. It is something you, yourself can do. Design the "ball and a wheelchair" experiment in such a way that the only variable left is air resistance and do the experiment yourself. You just have to throw two balls of the same weight but very different sizes so there will be a big difference in total air resistance. But do the experiment, don't just play with words and believe your own wild speculation.

I will give you a hint: if you do the actual experiment you delineate in your own post, you are going to see that you are wrong.

Quote from: markjo on November 17, 2012, 05:23:23 PM

Quote from: spaceman spiff on November 17, 2012, 02:54:51 PM

Quote

Newtons law working in the vacuum of space is a classic case of how people can be brainwashed into believing rockets work better. That's fine though, it just doesn't happen to convince me.

And how is it that Newton's law doesn't work in vacuum?

Who says that Newton's laws don't work in a vacuum?

I do.

What makes you an authority on Newton's laws or vacuums?  Have you ever tested Newton's laws in a vacuum?  Not a simulated vacuum, mind you, but an actual vacuum chamber.

Quote from: markjo on November 18, 2012, 08:01:21 AM

Quote from: sceptimatic on November 18, 2012, 03:59:03 AM

Quote from: markjo on November 17, 2012, 05:23:23 PM

Quote from: spaceman spiff on November 17, 2012, 02:54:51 PM

Quote

Newtons law working in the vacuum of space is a classic case of how people can be brainwashed into believing rockets work better. That's fine though, it just doesn't happen to convince me.

And how is it that Newton's law doesn't work in vacuum?

Who says that Newton's laws don't work in a vacuum?

I do.

What makes you an authority on Newton's laws or vacuums?  Have you ever tested Newton's laws in a vacuum?  Not a simulated vacuum, mind you, but an actual vacuum chamber.

Nope. Have you?

No, but I'm not the one saying that rockets don't work in a vacuum without any evidence. 

Quote from: RealScientist on November 18, 2012, 07:35:10 AM

Quote from: sceptimatic on November 18, 2012, 06:37:04 AM

Throwing a very heavy ball away from you will naturally overcome the air friction quite easily and will have minimal effect in pushing you away and this is where gravity and the mass of the ball come into play.

Demonstrate this. Do an experiment, and see if your predictions agree with the result of your own experiment.

You are telling us the result of experiments all the time, without even having the common decency to do the actual experiment, or otherwise giving a reason for your magical knowledge of the result of an experiment.

You are getting from this forum a sizable amount of information so you can do your own experiments and demonstrate to yourself how there is more to Science than you want to see. It is your responsibility with yourself to get out of your idea that if it sounds right to an Average Joe it has to be right.

There is one such thing as extrapolation. It is not a weird thing that only strange scientists in lab coats can do. It is something you, yourself can do. Design the "ball and a wheelchair" experiment in such a way that the only variable left is air resistance and do the experiment yourself. You just have to throw two balls of the same weight but very different sizes so there will be a big difference in total air resistance. But do the experiment, don't just play with words and believe your own wild speculation.

I will give you a hint: if you do the actual experiment you delineate in your own post, you are going to see that you are wrong.

I have done all the experiments.

This is why I know mass v gravity and large lighter weights v air resistance have more effect.

It's a variation of them all but gravity or air takes precedence depending on the mass and size of objects.

Now we all know you are a troll. If you had done the experiments, you would have said so a long time ago. And you would have some evidence to show, instead of sounding stupid by saying "yes, I have done the experiments that will earn me a Nobel Prize, I just did not feel like talking about having done them, for no reason at all".

Good day.

no you said you have done it with a medicine ball. nothing else.

for the record there is plenty of evidence that rockets work in a vacuum but you have chosen to deny it.

im getting the impression  this guys mother either slept with her brother or he is about 15, thinking he is all wise for transitioning through puberty.

Quote from: RealScientist on November 18, 2012, 08:18:34 AM

Quote from: sceptimatic on November 18, 2012, 07:41:08 AM

Quote from: RealScientist on November 18, 2012, 07:35:10 AM

Quote from: sceptimatic on November 18, 2012, 06:37:04 AM

Throwing a very heavy ball away from you will naturally overcome the air friction quite easily and will have minimal effect in pushing you away and this is where gravity and the mass of the ball come into play.

Demonstrate this. Do an experiment, and see if your predictions agree with the result of your own experiment.

You are telling us the result of experiments all the time, without even having the common decency to do the actual experiment, or otherwise giving a reason for your magical knowledge of the result of an experiment.

You are getting from this forum a sizable amount of information so you can do your own experiments and demonstrate to yourself how there is more to Science than you want to see. It is your responsibility with yourself to get out of your idea that if it sounds right to an Average Joe it has to be right.

There is one such thing as extrapolation. It is not a weird thing that only strange scientists in lab coats can do. It is something you, yourself can do. Design the "ball and a wheelchair" experiment in such a way that the only variable left is air resistance and do the experiment yourself. You just have to throw two balls of the same weight but very different sizes so there will be a big difference in total air resistance. But do the experiment, don't just play with words and believe your own wild speculation.

I will give you a hint: if you do the actual experiment you delineate in your own post, you are going to see that you are wrong.

I have done all the experiments.

This is why I know mass v gravity and large lighter weights v air resistance have more effect.

It's a variation of them all but gravity or air takes precedence depending on the mass and size of objects.

Now we all know you are a troll. If you had done the experiments, you would have said so a long time ago. And you would have some evidence to show, instead of sounding stupid by saying "yes, I have done the experiments that will earn me a Nobel Prize, I just did not feel like talking about having done them, for no reason at all".

Good day.

You should pay attention. I said I've done the ball experiments, I suppose many have.
The troll argument is old man, give it up.
People use the troll argument because they cannot deal with the alternatives to their views. Man up.

After all, you are a real scientist aren't you or is that just your name for show.
You have no more proof than I have about what I've said, other than what you've been spoon fed.

Then show your logbook with the journal of your experiments. Or did the dog eat your homework?

I will give you whatever I can get for my house and my car in exchange for the logs of any experiment that has been correctly done and disproves Newton's Laws in conditions such as those mentioned in this forum. You can also get a million dollars just by repeating your experiments in front of the people of James Randi's JREF Foundation. It is as simple as filling a form in which you tell in detail the way in which your experiment contradicts currently known Physics and repeating your experiments in front of people who can verify it. Or, are you just not into having money?

Realscientist:
You know as well as I do that neither you nor I can prove it either way , unless we have the benefit of going into the vacuum of space or at the very least being able to create an environment like the vacuum of space, which is nigh on impossible.

As much as you saying Newtons law works in a vacuum and showing experiments, they prove nothing and you know it.

You are running for cover now that you are actually requested to show something other than blabber.

Everybody has been telling you that you can do all sorts of experiments in a vacuum chamber, which is something well within your reach, even more so since you are gathering evidence to get a million dollars from the JREF, a Nobel Prize and enough fame and fortune for the rest of your life.

Even if you do not want to get a vacuum chamber you can design experiments that demonstrate your brilliance in air of different densities, like the air by the sea and the air on a high mountain.

Or, are you trying to tell us that air and/or outer space vacuum are magical, and you cannot experiment with them in a vacuum chamber or a pressure chamber?

PS. I have just read that you say that vacuum in a vacuum chamber is not like vacuum in outer space. Exactly what does one have that the other does not?

Quote from: robertotrevor on November 18, 2012, 09:37:38 AM

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

I know what a vacuum chamber is but it cannot replicate the vacuum of space.

Why no? vacuum is vacuum.

It's a walled cylinder with the air sucked out, that's it.

Isn't that pretty much the definition of a vacuum?

Quote from: squevil on November 18, 2012, 08:47:04 AM

no you said you have done it with a medicine ball. nothing else.

for the record there is plenty of evidence that rockets work in a vacuum but you have chosen to deny it.

im getting the impression  this guys mother either slept with her brother or he is about 15, thinking he is all wise for transitioning through puberty.

The impression you get makes no odds to me, all it does is shows you up for what you are. Anyway, not to get into childish games with name calling and stuff which serves no purpose on an internet message board ....what evidence is there that rockets work in a vacuum?

there are countless documented space missions. you choose to deny there existence. i wasnt name calling, i was just making an observation. i just think you are very childish in your whole "i know more than all of you because i refuse to believe the authority". im guessing your are mad because your teacher gave you lots of homework.

Quote from: robertotrevor on November 18, 2012, 10:20:38 AM

Quote from: sceptimatic on November 18, 2012, 09:54:13 AM

Quote from: robertotrevor on November 18, 2012, 09:37:38 AM

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

I know what a vacuum chamber is but it cannot replicate the vacuum of space.

Why no? vacuum is vacuum.

Because it's a chamber on Earth.
It's not the vast vacuum of space.

It's a walled cylinder with the air sucked out, that's it.

That is what vacuum is, even if you like to believe vacuum is a magic field that neutralize matter, there is nothing suggesting that. The difference between earth atmosphere and space, are earth gases, i mean, the earth atmosphere are the gases, if they were gone we would be on "vacuum" if you suck out earth gases from a chamber, it becomes vacuum, vacuum is vacuum (where do you get lost).

you said a rocket wouldnt work in a vacuum.

like i said you just deny it, that doesnt make it true. as we can see objects in orbit from earth i think that invalidates your claims already.

Quote from: squevil on November 18, 2012, 10:48:22 AM

you said a rocket wouldnt work in a vacuum.

I stand by what I've said.

Then why don't you test a rocket in a vacuum chamber?

would a firework be classed as a rocket? if so this is quite easy to perform

the ISS is seen from earth. now before you start off on one. answer these as well.

how does it move so fast

what can it be

how can it stay up with that shape


also the 8th space tourist is planning to visit the ISS for $13 million.

Quote from: markjo on November 18, 2012, 10:53:09 AM

Quote from: sceptimatic on November 18, 2012, 10:49:53 AM

Quote from: squevil on November 18, 2012, 10:48:22 AM

you said a rocket wouldnt work in a vacuum.

I stand by what I've said.

Then why don't you test a rocket in a vacuum chamber?

The balloon experiment was enough to show me that rockets do not work in a vacuum.

Not if you don't perform it in a vacuum.

Quote from: markjo on November 18, 2012, 11:10:33 AM

Quote from: sceptimatic on November 18, 2012, 10:58:50 AM

Quote from: markjo on November 18, 2012, 10:53:09 AM

Quote from: sceptimatic on November 18, 2012, 10:49:53 AM

Quote from: squevil on November 18, 2012, 10:48:22 AM

you said a rocket wouldnt work in a vacuum.

I stand by what I've said.

Then why don't you test a rocket in a vacuum chamber?

The balloon experiment was enough to show me that rockets do not work in a vacuum.

Not if you don't perform it in a vacuum.

The larger flat balloon is a vacuum. It contains no air.

An empty balloon is not the same as a vacuum chamber.