You say the ISS isn't in a vacuum and there's "slight" air pressure at supposedly 230 miles and yet Felix Baumgartner is in "slight" air pressure, supposedly, at 21 miles. Do you see any problems with the bull c rap yet?
Not at all. Felix (and Joseph Kittinger before him) were at an altitude that could support a balloon. They were actually below the point at which meteors 'burn up' in our atmosphere--below the Columbia disaster. So while the air pressure was much less than at sea level, there was/is still very much air pressure there.
The ISS is well above balloon height. However, there's no definite edge to space, and the atmosphere continues well above the ISS. While there's not enough to lift a balloon, there's enough to slow down LEO satellites moving over 7 km/s. Atmosphere here is about 1/1000000 times the density of sea level, or 1.4 x 10-5 psi (.1 Pa), which is much greater than the "1*10-12" to which you have agreed is still not a vacuum.
And since there's air, albeit a very tiny amount, rockets would still work (just as the gun worked in that box with a very tiny amount of air). This this entire thread is irrelevant.
No...it's not this thread that's irrelevant but the post from you is irrelevant and totally wrong.
How is his post irrelevant? You only have a problem with a perfect vacuum, and no one has ever claimed that there are absolutely no gases where satellites orbit. In fact, you even made a thread a while back about satellites needing to be reboosted.
When I argue a point with people like you, I have to use what you accept as true to make my points, which is why I try and destroy your little magical things from how you people think.
Let's take a brief moment to remind ourselves what Sceptimatic has said to date.
I don't know how high the atmosphere, in it's full entirety, stretches but the sun is inside of it.
The sun is in our atmosphere.
Everything other than the very lightest elements (which will freeze against the vacuum)
You say the ice dome cannot exist as the air would expand into that vacuum.....what air?
There is no air to expand into it, it's already expanded gas, either helium or nitrogen or something like that, which "FREEZES" the minute it starts to hit a vacuum
Air (at least helium and nitrogen) will freeze when subjected to a vacuum.
The sun inside the ice dome is what is seen, not in space, outside of it.
The sun is inside the dome.
Okay, so recap of the recap. The dome is made of air that froze against the vacuum of not-Earth. The sun is inside the dome, in our atmosphere. The sun's accepted (and calculated) distance is roughly 3000 miles (not a sceptimatic quote, but I'll assume everyone here accepts the math FE uses). The ISS, according to ... everyone, is well below that, at only a few hundred miles. Thus, it's inside an atmosphere.
Thus, rockets should work at the altitude of the ISS (and at least up to the altitude of the Sun). Everyone still with me?
Now, one more quote
In a vacuum like space, the tank at 14 psi has nothing to hold it back, at all, so it expands to it's fullest, meaning the cylinder is breached.
Any problems with this?
A cylinder full of air will breach when subjected to a vacuum.
But this cylinder's full of air (see the past 20 pages or so). So it breaches, but then the air immediately freezes against the vacuum, plugging the hole. Problem solved!
Don't get mad at me if I point out inconsistencies in your own arguments, scepti. By your own posts, the ISS can't exist because rockets don't work in a vacuum. But there's no vacuum beneath the ice-dome, so the ISS is not in a vacuum. Thus, the past 80 pages have been irrelevant.