Space Flight

  • 870 Replies
  • 211647 Views
Re: Space Flight
« Reply #300 on: June 14, 2013, 07:03:41 AM »
You staying alive. Your lungs have to work against the atmospheric pressure to take a breath.
A vehicle requires air to work.
Anything 'on' earth, requires atmospheric pressure to enable it to work.
Basically, to use energy, we need an atmosphere.
What about an electric motor powered by solar power or a battery?
I'd like to agree with you but then we'd both be wrong!

*

DuckDodgers

  • One Duck to Rule Them All
  • 5479
  • What's supposed to go here?
Re: Space Flight
« Reply #301 on: June 14, 2013, 07:07:23 AM »
The only law it violates, is the law of bull shit science.
It's already been shown to you how your idea violates the law of conservation of motion and by extension the equal and opposite force.   Mass is accelerated out the back of the bottle or rocket, this is a force.   Forces do not exist without their pair.   So since a force is applied out the back,  the same amount of force is applied to the front.  It is literally as simple as that.
You know... you sort of grasp it...but you can't quite get there.
This is because you refuse to release your grip of the official 'how rockets work' theory.

You are correct. Forces do not exist 'on earth' without an equal to it. It's just a shame you send your reactionary force inside rockets arse end.
This is the only problem you are having.

The ass end of the rocket is where the mass is being ejected.   It follows suit that the opposite force must be within the rocket as well.   The atmosphere does some work on the expelled matter,  but that cannot travel back up the continuously flowing matter unless it were still attached to the rocket.
markjo, what force can not pass through a solid or liquid?
Magnetism for one and electric is the other.

?

Puttah

  • 1860
Re: Space Flight
« Reply #302 on: June 14, 2013, 07:17:07 AM »
In vacuum chambers, do the laws of physics not work the same way they do in a regular atmosphere? If that pressurized water bottle were to be released in the chamber, it wouldn't shoot water out of one end and the bottle fly away in the other? Is this what you're saying?
Scepti, this idiocy needs to stop and it needs to stop right now. You are making a mockery of this fine forum with your poor trolling. You are a complete disgrace.

*

DuckDodgers

  • One Duck to Rule Them All
  • 5479
  • What's supposed to go here?
Re: Space Flight
« Reply #303 on: June 14, 2013, 07:33:29 AM »


Quote from: DuckDodgers
The ass end of the rocket is where the mass is being ejected.   It follows suit that the opposite force must be within the rocket as well.   The atmosphere does some work on the expelled matter,  but that cannot travel back up the continuously flowing matter unless it were still attached to the rocket.
Correct, it doesn't travel back up the rockets arse end.
It fights off the mass of hot, severely unbelievably fast hot gases trying to barge their way through it and the dense atmosphere cannot do much against the really hot parts, other than to exert a push against it but cannot penetrate it, so it waits till it slows down, because all it can do , under the hot flame is try and slow it down until it eventually does stop it and then starts to push it back.

This is carried on in nano seconds all the way up, or as long as the rocket has hot thrusting force.

If you have ever tried to push up on a stream of water coming out of a bottle or tried to push on a rope you will see how that explanation makes 0 sense.
markjo, what force can not pass through a solid or liquid?
Magnetism for one and electric is the other.

?

Puttah

  • 1860
Re: Space Flight
« Reply #304 on: June 14, 2013, 07:46:22 AM »
In vacuum chambers, do the laws of physics not work the same way they do in a regular atmosphere? If that pressurized water bottle were to be released in the chamber, it wouldn't shoot water out of one end and the bottle fly away in the other? Is this what you're saying?
The air in the bottle would expand and burst the bottle, then the vacuum would turn the water to gas and it will be all sucked out, assuming the vacuum pump was still sucking.

I didn't question your understanding about phase diagrams, nor did I ask where the water in the bottle would end up after shooting out. I asked how the motion of the bottle and water would be affected during pressure release. We're discussing physics here, not chemistry or the mechanics of the vacuum chamber.
« Last Edit: June 14, 2013, 07:48:22 AM by Puttah »
Scepti, this idiocy needs to stop and it needs to stop right now. You are making a mockery of this fine forum with your poor trolling. You are a complete disgrace.

Re: Space Flight
« Reply #305 on: June 14, 2013, 07:47:13 AM »
You staying alive. Your lungs have to work against the atmospheric pressure to take a breath.
A vehicle requires air to work.
Anything 'on' earth, requires atmospheric pressure to enable it to work.
Basically, to use energy, we need an atmosphere.
What about an electric motor powered by solar power or a battery?
How does it stay cool?
Why would it overheat?
I'd like to agree with you but then we'd both be wrong!

?

Puttah

  • 1860
Re: Space Flight
« Reply #306 on: June 14, 2013, 07:56:37 AM »
In vacuum chambers, do the laws of physics not work the same way they do in a regular atmosphere? If that pressurized water bottle were to be released in the chamber, it wouldn't shoot water out of one end and the bottle fly away in the other? Is this what you're saying?
The air in the bottle would expand and burst the bottle, then the vacuum would turn the water to gas and it will be all sucked out, assuming the vacuum pump was still sucking.

I didn't question your understanding about phase diagrams, nor did I ask where the water in the bottle would end up after shooting out. I asked how the motion of the bottle and water would be affected during pressure release. We're discussing physics here, not chemistry or the mechanics of the vacuum chamber.
It can't happen.
You can not put a air and water bottle into a vacuum, then open it up, as it would immediately expand and blow open the minute it became a vacuum.

When it expands and blows open due to the larger pressure difference, wouldn't the bottle shoot away from the direction the water is being shot out?
Scepti, this idiocy needs to stop and it needs to stop right now. You are making a mockery of this fine forum with your poor trolling. You are a complete disgrace.

*

DuckDodgers

  • One Duck to Rule Them All
  • 5479
  • What's supposed to go here?
Re: Space Flight
« Reply #307 on: June 14, 2013, 07:58:42 AM »
In vacuum chambers, do the laws of physics not work the same way they do in a regular atmosphere? If that pressurized water bottle were to be released in the chamber, it wouldn't shoot water out of one end and the bottle fly away in the other? Is this what you're saying?
The air in the bottle would expand and burst the bottle, then the vacuum would turn the water to gas and it will be all sucked out, assuming the vacuum pump was still sucking.

I didn't question your understanding about phase diagrams, nor did I ask where the water in the bottle would end up after shooting out. I asked how the motion of the bottle and water would be affected during pressure release. We're discussing physics here, not chemistry or the mechanics of the vacuum chamber.
It can't happen.
You can not put a air and water bottle into a vacuum, then open it up, as it would immediately expand and blow open the minute it became a vacuum.
Why would it do that?  Things have been designed to accommodate thousands of psi pressure differentials,  this is just a matter of 20 psi difference at the most?
markjo, what force can not pass through a solid or liquid?
Magnetism for one and electric is the other.

*

DuckDodgers

  • One Duck to Rule Them All
  • 5479
  • What's supposed to go here?
Re: Space Flight
« Reply #308 on: June 14, 2013, 08:02:38 AM »


Quote from: DuckDodgers
The ass end of the rocket is where the mass is being ejected.   It follows suit that the opposite force must be within the rocket as well.   The atmosphere does some work on the expelled matter,  but that cannot travel back up the continuously flowing matter unless it were still attached to the rocket.
Correct, it doesn't travel back up the rockets arse end.
It fights off the mass of hot, severely unbelievably fast hot gases trying to barge their way through it and the dense atmosphere cannot do much against the really hot parts, other than to exert a push against it but cannot penetrate it, so it waits till it slows down, because all it can do , under the hot flame is try and slow it down until it eventually does stop it and then starts to push it back.

This is carried on in nano seconds all the way up, or as long as the rocket has hot thrusting force.

If you have ever tried to push up on a stream of water coming out of a bottle or tried to push on a rope you will see how that explanation makes 0 sense.
Because what you are explaining has no relevance to what I've just said.
You need to think.
I've thought about it and I still fail to see how a constant stream of non-rigid matter can transfer any outside kinetic energy in a direction opposite to its movement, i.e. the gas flowing down and atmosphere applying kinetic energy to the rocket up stream.
markjo, what force can not pass through a solid or liquid?
Magnetism for one and electric is the other.

Re: Space Flight
« Reply #309 on: June 14, 2013, 08:07:58 AM »
You staying alive. Your lungs have to work against the atmospheric pressure to take a breath.
A vehicle requires air to work.
Anything 'on' earth, requires atmospheric pressure to enable it to work.
Basically, to use energy, we need an atmosphere.
What about an electric motor powered by solar power or a battery?
How does it stay cool?
Why would it overheat?
Come on man, are you being serious?
If the battery is doing work...it's creating heat and if air isn't there to cool it, then what do you think would happen?
You really need to build yourself a vacuum chamber.
I'd like to agree with you but then we'd both be wrong!

*

DuckDodgers

  • One Duck to Rule Them All
  • 5479
  • What's supposed to go here?
Re: Space Flight
« Reply #310 on: June 14, 2013, 08:10:53 AM »

Quote from: DuckDodgers
I've thought about it and I still fail to see how a constant stream of non-rigid matter can transfer any outside kinetic energy in a direction opposite to its movement, i.e. the gas flowing down and atmosphere applying kinetic energy to the rocket up stream.

Go and get a lighter and turn it upside down and light it and tell me what the flame is doing and why it does this.

The flame is a far cry from the lighter itself.  We aren't concerned with what the expelled matter does once it is no longer acting on the rocket.
markjo, what force can not pass through a solid or liquid?
Magnetism for one and electric is the other.

*

DuckDodgers

  • One Duck to Rule Them All
  • 5479
  • What's supposed to go here?
Re: Space Flight
« Reply #311 on: June 14, 2013, 08:15:30 AM »

Quote from: Manarq
You really need to build yourself a vacuum chamber.
It would be good to have one...but I don't need one to think I know what a vacuum would do to stuff.
That seems more accurate.
markjo, what force can not pass through a solid or liquid?
Magnetism for one and electric is the other.

*

markjo

  • Content Nazi
  • The Elder Ones
  • 42529
Re: Space Flight
« Reply #312 on: June 14, 2013, 08:20:07 AM »
Basically, to use energy, we need an atmosphere.
A flashlight uses energy.  Does a flashlight need an atmosphere?
Science is what happens when preconception meets verification.
Quote from: Robosteve
Besides, perhaps FET is a conspiracy too.
Quote from: bullhorn
It is just the way it is, you understanding it doesn't concern me.

?

Puttah

  • 1860
Re: Space Flight
« Reply #313 on: June 14, 2013, 08:20:58 AM »
Yes...but only because it's blew open and made the vacuum cylinder a non vacuum cylinder, so now it can act against the walls of the cylinder and so, blowing the bottle about,as well as the water.

What do you mean by "now it can act against the walls"? Do you expect some kind of delay in the bottle's motion during the time the chamber is still a vacuum versus when it fills up sufficiently with gas?

It's so cute how you call the entire scientific community indoctrinated, while this scepti science is being spewed out from seemingly nowhere. It seems that you think that whatever makes sense in your head must be the answer and I'm sure there exists a very lovely adjective that would describe this type of personality.
Scepti, this idiocy needs to stop and it needs to stop right now. You are making a mockery of this fine forum with your poor trolling. You are a complete disgrace.

*

DuckDodgers

  • One Duck to Rule Them All
  • 5479
  • What's supposed to go here?
Re: Space Flight
« Reply #314 on: June 14, 2013, 08:24:09 AM »

Quote from: Manarq
You really need to build yourself a vacuum chamber.
It would be good to have one...but I don't need one to think I know what a vacuum would do to stuff.
That seems more accurate.
If you want to be a prick, then carry on..but you do it without reply from now on.

I wasn't being a prick.   To know what would happen for certain you need to carry out the experiment.   I haven't so I can only make an educated guess as to what would happen.   I'm fairly sure but I do not know.
markjo, what force can not pass through a solid or liquid?
Magnetism for one and electric is the other.

?

Puttah

  • 1860
Re: Space Flight
« Reply #315 on: June 14, 2013, 08:25:36 AM »

Quote from: Manarq
You really need to build yourself a vacuum chamber.
It would be good to have one...but I don't need one to know what a vacuum would do to stuff.

So experimentation has otherwise been a big waste of time for humanity.
Scepti, this idiocy needs to stop and it needs to stop right now. You are making a mockery of this fine forum with your poor trolling. You are a complete disgrace.

?

Puttah

  • 1860
Re: Space Flight
« Reply #316 on: June 14, 2013, 08:35:16 AM »
Quote from: Puttah
What do you mean by "now it can act against the walls"? Do you expect some kind of delay in the bottle's motion during the time the chamber is still a vacuum versus when it fills up sufficiently with gas?
Once the bottle expands and breaks...the air will 'immediately' fill the vacuum and hitting the walls. What part of this can't you get a grip of?

The 'immediately' part. You just quoted me asking if you expect some kind of delay in the bottle's motion, and obviously by the quotations used, you know the air can't hit the walls in zero time.
If we took an even larger vacuum chamber that has walls much further away, will the bottle delay even longer?
Scepti, this idiocy needs to stop and it needs to stop right now. You are making a mockery of this fine forum with your poor trolling. You are a complete disgrace.

?

Puttah

  • 1860
Re: Space Flight
« Reply #317 on: June 14, 2013, 08:50:50 AM »
Quote from: Puttah
What do you mean by "now it can act against the walls"? Do you expect some kind of delay in the bottle's motion during the time the chamber is still a vacuum versus when it fills up sufficiently with gas?
Once the bottle expands and breaks...the air will 'immediately' fill the vacuum and hitting the walls. What part of this can't you get a grip of?

The 'immediately' part. You just quoted me asking if you expect some kind of delay in the bottle's motion, and obviously by the quotations used, you know the air can't hit the walls in zero time.
If we took an even larger vacuum chamber that has walls much further away, will the bottle delay even longer?
It's about equalizing the pressure.
The bigger the vacuum, the quicker the bottle will expand and pop. In space it will be immediate, no matter what size container is in it.

And how do you know that? Wait, sorry, stupid question...

The atmospheric pressure at 15 psi versus a vacuum at 0 psi is a difference of 15 psi, which is about the same difference as your car's tyres versus the atmosphere. There are many materials that can withstand such forces, so no, the bottle won't necessarily expand and pop.

Actually, you know what? I think it's a valid question and should be answered. So how do you know what you're saying is true, especially when people that have done the experiments have shown results that differ to your description?
Scepti, this idiocy needs to stop and it needs to stop right now. You are making a mockery of this fine forum with your poor trolling. You are a complete disgrace.

*

Rama Set

  • 6877
  • I am also an engineer
Re: Space Flight
« Reply #318 on: June 14, 2013, 08:52:33 AM »
Quote from: Puttah
What do you mean by "now it can act against the walls"? Do you expect some kind of delay in the bottle's motion during the time the chamber is still a vacuum versus when it fills up sufficiently with gas?
Once the bottle expands and breaks...the air will 'immediately' fill the vacuum and hitting the walls. What part of this can't you get a grip of?

The 'immediately' part. You just quoted me asking if you expect some kind of delay in the bottle's motion, and obviously by the quotations used, you know the air can't hit the walls in zero time.
If we took an even larger vacuum chamber that has walls much further away, will the bottle delay even longer?
It's about equalizing the pressure.
The bigger the vacuum, the quicker the bottle will expand and pop. In space it will be immediate, no matter what size container is in it.

This is not true, because the contents of the bottle do not apply more pressure depending on the size of the vaccuum.  If the contents apply 20 psi, then it is always 20 psi.
Aether is the  characteristic of action or inaction of charged  & noncharged particals.

*

DuckDodgers

  • One Duck to Rule Them All
  • 5479
  • What's supposed to go here?
Re: Space Flight
« Reply #319 on: June 14, 2013, 09:44:04 AM »
If you pressurized a tire in a sealed container at atmo,  what would happen to said tire when taken out of the sealed container?
markjo, what force can not pass through a solid or liquid?
Magnetism for one and electric is the other.

Re: Space Flight
« Reply #320 on: June 14, 2013, 09:49:46 AM »
Quote from: Puttah
What do you mean by "now it can act against the walls"? Do you expect some kind of delay in the bottle's motion during the time the chamber is still a vacuum versus when it fills up sufficiently with gas?
Once the bottle expands and breaks...the air will 'immediately' fill the vacuum and hitting the walls. What part of this can't you get a grip of?

The 'immediately' part. You just quoted me asking if you expect some kind of delay in the bottle's motion, and obviously by the quotations used, you know the air can't hit the walls in zero time.
If we took an even larger vacuum chamber that has walls much further away, will the bottle delay even longer?
It's about equalizing the pressure.
The bigger the vacuum, the quicker the bottle will expand and pop. In space it will be immediate, no matter what size container is in it.

This is not true, because the contents of the bottle do not apply more pressure depending on the size of the vaccuum.  If the contents apply 20 psi, then it is always 20 psi.
No it's not.
The air would expand to equalize the pressure of the vacuum, which is zero psi.

We cannot make a complete vacuum on earth but we can get close to it.
If we try to extract air from a cylinder...no matter how strong it is, then sooner or later (assuming we had a suction pump strong enough), the container would implode.

If space is the vacuum we are told it is, then air or fuel will 'try fill it by expansion and no container we know of would contain that expansion, which would not stop until it breached the container.
Remember: there is nothing pushing back against the container like on earth, so it's going to breach and feed the vacuum.

So you haven't tested it and just say , "they do"...
Ok, I suppose your participation in this thread should be over now as you have it all worked out...see yeah. ;)

Well well well...

« Last Edit: June 14, 2013, 09:51:20 AM by Antonio »

*

Rama Set

  • 6877
  • I am also an engineer
Re: Space Flight
« Reply #321 on: June 14, 2013, 09:51:59 AM »
Quote from: Puttah
What do you mean by "now it can act against the walls"? Do you expect some kind of delay in the bottle's motion during the time the chamber is still a vacuum versus when it fills up sufficiently with gas?
Once the bottle expands and breaks...the air will 'immediately' fill the vacuum and hitting the walls. What part of this can't you get a grip of?

The 'immediately' part. You just quoted me asking if you expect some kind of delay in the bottle's motion, and obviously by the quotations used, you know the air can't hit the walls in zero time.
If we took an even larger vacuum chamber that has walls much further away, will the bottle delay even longer?
It's about equalizing the pressure.
The bigger the vacuum, the quicker the bottle will expand and pop. In space it will be immediate, no matter what size container is in it.

This is not true, because the contents of the bottle do not apply more pressure depending on the size of the vaccuum.  If the contents apply 20 psi, then it is always 20 psi.
No it's not.
The air would expand to equalize the pressure of the vacuum, which is zero psi.

The air would try to expand yes, but the  net pressure it applies would not go up simply because you are in a vacuum.
Aether is the  characteristic of action or inaction of charged  & noncharged particals.

?

Scintific Method

  • 1448
  • Trust, but verify.
Re: Space Flight
« Reply #322 on: June 14, 2013, 10:44:39 AM »
A vacuum is a vacuum, whether its a small light bulb or the expanse of space, it's still just 0psi.
Quote from: jtelroy
...the FE'ers still found a way to deny it. Not with counter arguments. Not with proof of any kind. By simply denying it.

"Better to keep your mouth shut and be thought a fool, than to open it and remove all doubt."

*

DuckDodgers

  • One Duck to Rule Them All
  • 5479
  • What's supposed to go here?
Re: Space Flight
« Reply #323 on: June 14, 2013, 10:45:07 AM »
If you pressurized a tire in a sealed container at atmo,  what would happen to said tire when taken out of the sealed container?
It would blow the container apart before you got it out. It would just compress the air already inside.
Let me rephrase,  if you were inside a sealed room at atmo, no air in or out , and you filled a tire to the proper pressure; what would happen to the tire when you removed it from the sealed room and exposed it to the atmospheric pressure?
markjo, what force can not pass through a solid or liquid?
Magnetism for one and electric is the other.

*

DuckDodgers

  • One Duck to Rule Them All
  • 5479
  • What's supposed to go here?
Re: Space Flight
« Reply #324 on: June 14, 2013, 11:08:35 AM »
If you pressurized a tire in a sealed container at atmo,  what would happen to said tire when taken out of the sealed container?
It would blow the container apart before you got it out. It would just compress the air already inside.
Let me rephrase,  if you were inside a sealed room at atmo, no air in or out , and you filled a tire to the proper pressure; what would happen to the tire when you removed it from the sealed room and exposed it to the atmospheric pressure?
You couldn't do it.

Why?  It should just drop the pressure inside the room a bit too do it,  as well as add a bit more carbon dioxide and other biproducts of the pump.   What makes it impossible?
markjo, what force can not pass through a solid or liquid?
Magnetism for one and electric is the other.

Re: Space Flight
« Reply #325 on: June 14, 2013, 01:55:33 PM »


Quote from: Rama Set
The air would try to expand yes, but the  net pressure it applies would not go up simply because you are in a vacuum.
You have seen a balloon in a vacuum chamber right?
The more air that gets sucked out...the bigger the balloon expands to fill the vacuum and then it pops.
Just like your space rocket would if space is a vacuum and it could reach space.
That's the most stupid thing I've ever read. Why don't scuba tanks explode? Same concept.

*

Rama Set

  • 6877
  • I am also an engineer
Re: Space Flight
« Reply #326 on: June 14, 2013, 02:47:45 PM »


Quote from: Rama Set
The air would try to expand yes, but the  net pressure it applies would not go up simply because you are in a vacuum.
You have seen a balloon in a vacuum chamber right?
The more air that gets sucked out...the bigger the balloon expands to fill the vacuum and then it pops.
Just like your space rocket would if space is a vacuum and it could reach space.

Space craft are not made from a thin sheet of a highly elastic substance. This makes all the difference in the world.
Aether is the  characteristic of action or inaction of charged  & noncharged particals.

?

Puttah

  • 1860
Re: Space Flight
« Reply #327 on: June 14, 2013, 09:11:06 PM »
Quote from: Puttah
What do you mean by "now it can act against the walls"? Do you expect some kind of delay in the bottle's motion during the time the chamber is still a vacuum versus when it fills up sufficiently with gas?
Once the bottle expands and breaks...the air will 'immediately' fill the vacuum and hitting the walls. What part of this can't you get a grip of?

The 'immediately' part. You just quoted me asking if you expect some kind of delay in the bottle's motion, and obviously by the quotations used, you know the air can't hit the walls in zero time.
If we took an even larger vacuum chamber that has walls much further away, will the bottle delay even longer?
It's about equalizing the pressure.
The bigger the vacuum, the quicker the bottle will expand and pop. In space it will be immediate, no matter what size container is in it.

And how do you know that? Wait, sorry, stupid question...

The atmospheric pressure at 15 psi versus a vacuum at 0 psi is a difference of 15 psi, which is about the same difference as your car's tyres versus the atmosphere. There are many materials that can withstand such forces, so no, the bottle won't necessarily expand and pop.

Actually, you know what? I think it's a valid question and should be answered. So how do you know what you're saying is true, especially when people that have done the experiments have shown results that differ to your description?
Give yourself 10 minutes to think this through.

If you have a small glass vacuum chamber, then we can agree that it's not wise to use a heavy duty vacuum pump, right?
The reason is very simple: It will implode the chamber due to atmospheric pressure exerting more of it's pressure at it, 'equally' all over the chamber.

The larger the chamber...the stronger it has to be, because it has an enormous amount of psi inside it and an enormous amount surrounding the outside of it, equalizing it from inside and out.

You keep sucking the air out and the outside pressure pushes in because it 'must' equalize that pressure and only the strength of the chamber is in it's way.
Keep sucking the air out and the air pressure outside will just keep exerting it's force.

If you don't release all of the air inside the chamber, then it may hold up against the atmospheric pressure ...but if the chamber isn't equalized and stays a partial vacuum, then the stresses on it are immense  and over time, it will implode,which could take no more than a touch of your hand on it.

In space...the vacuum, as we are told it is will have to be filled by the gases of the rocket, if the rocket could make it...which it couldn't...due to extremely low air pressure so far up into the sky, which would render the rocket a dead stick.

If by some miracle  the rocket could make it...then the gases would simply expand and expand until they filled that vacuum...or should I say...dispersed into it, as nothing could fill it.

Bolded part is wrong, hence the rest of your post is probably relying on a wrong assumption and hence itself is invalid. Fix it and I'll consider giving the scept science another glance.
« Last Edit: June 14, 2013, 09:13:12 PM by Puttah »
Scepti, this idiocy needs to stop and it needs to stop right now. You are making a mockery of this fine forum with your poor trolling. You are a complete disgrace.

Re: Space Flight
« Reply #328 on: June 15, 2013, 01:15:19 AM »
but maybe space is not an absolute vacuum.
why do you believe everything you are told scepti?

what Zetetic experiments have you performed?

Re: Space Flight
« Reply #329 on: June 15, 2013, 01:34:49 AM »
but maybe space is not an absolute vacuum.
why do you believe everything you are told scepti?

what Zetetic experiments have you performed?
I don't believe everything I'm told, so what kind of comment is this?
I said, "if space is the vacuum they tell us it is."
The problem still stands about vacuums though.




but the problem is, yes, you do believe what you are told.
you have been force fed that space is an absolute vacuum.

Please list Zetetic experiments that you have performed that give evidence towards this.