People on skateboards.

Quote from: sceptimatic on December 08, 2015, 08:02:29 AM

Quote from: luckyfred on December 08, 2015, 07:56:23 AM

Quote from: sceptimatic on December 08, 2015, 07:29:45 AM

Quote from: sokarul on December 08, 2015, 07:24:28 AM

Oh goodie. The 300 mph wind that propelled baseballs and golf balls....and anything else in motion is back. I missed it.

You can't knock reality. We all know what reality is and space nor magical forces have any bearing on how it pans out.

It actually shocks me that so many people on here refuse to grasp it because their ego's are too big and delicate to dare to take the time to understand it.

provide me some scientific papers that shows what u claim and i'll be happy to read and understand them.

otherwise u're just a random guy on the internet claim that all my studies and my everyday experiences are wrong, why should i trust u and distrust myself and some pretty knowledgable people

I'm not the least bit interested whether you trust me or not. It's entirely up to you what you take from what is being said. All I ask people to do is to search their own minds and use logic and common sense to decide for themselves what is true or false or potentially viable against something that may not be realistic when actually given some thought to.

You carry on as you are and you don't need to type one more word to me, ever. Just talk among your internet like-minded friends and spend your days mocking people like me if it makes you feel intelligent or superior.
I don't think you're a dummy or anything.  I just believe you are ultra naive, unless what you're doing is deliberate and that's  why your hours on here are being wasted.

u don't have to use common sense, u need to use physics

As long as  the physics make sense and are not used to dupe us like much of it is - especially the space garbage.

Quote from: sokarul on December 08, 2015, 07:24:28 AM

Oh goodie. The 300 mph wind that propelled baseballs and golf balls....and anything else in motion is back. I missed it.

You can't knock reality. We all know what reality is and space nor magical forces have any bearing on how it pans out.

It actually shocks me that so many people on here refuse to grasp it because their ego's are too big and delicate to dare to take the time to understand it.

Shut the fuck up already. No one likes you. You have nothing. End of story.

physics make sense, especially the basic physics we're talking about.
if u don't have the education to grasp it is only your problem, physics still make sense and still works perfectly

Quote from: sceptimatic on December 08, 2015, 07:29:45 AM

Quote from: sokarul on December 08, 2015, 07:24:28 AM

Oh goodie. The 300 mph wind that propelled baseballs and golf balls....and anything else in motion is back. I missed it.

You can't knock reality. We all know what reality is and space nor magical forces have any bearing on how it pans out.

It actually shocks me that so many people on here refuse to grasp it because their ego's are too big and delicate to dare to take the time to understand it.

Shut the fuck up already. No one likes you. You have nothing. End of story.

You're not rattled are you?
This is what happens when assistants working in a pharmacy shop believe that putting pills into bottles gives them the right to be expert on all sciences. 

physics make sense, especially the basic physics we're talking about.
if u don't have the education to grasp it is only your problem, physics still make sense and still works perfectly

No they don't. Not the one's you're made to believe. Space does not exist so any physics that pertain to this space, is a con job, simple as that.

Quote from: luckyfred on December 08, 2015, 08:57:40 AM

physics make sense, especially the basic physics we're talking about.
if u don't have the education to grasp it is only your problem, physics still make sense and still works perfectly

No they don't. Not the one's you're made to believe. Space does not exist so any physics that pertain to this space, is a con job, simple as that.

so show me a book with the real physics' law.

ps the problem is that what we're talking about are law ALSO applied to space, but mainly they applied to every day life. example, none of civil/mechanical engineers design using the concept of denpressure

Quote from: sokarul on December 08, 2015, 08:53:30 AM

Quote from: sceptimatic on December 08, 2015, 07:29:45 AM

Quote from: sokarul on December 08, 2015, 07:24:28 AM

Oh goodie. The 300 mph wind that propelled baseballs and golf balls....and anything else in motion is back. I missed it.

You can't knock reality. We all know what reality is and space nor magical forces have any bearing on how it pans out.

It actually shocks me that so many people on here refuse to grasp it because their ego's are too big and delicate to dare to take the time to understand it.

Shut the fuck up already. No one likes you. You have nothing. End of story.

You're not rattled are you?
This is what happens when assistants working in a pharmacy shop believe that putting pills into bottles gives them the right to be expert on all sciences. 

Who's works in a pharmacy? Is that another one of your claims? Millionair assistant?

 When a golfer hits a golf ball, what propelled it after it leaves the club?(we had this conversation before)

If you want to add something productive to the discussion, then please do.  If you just want to shitpost abusive gibberish, then feel free to fuck off.

Bonus LULZ!!!

Look at pathetic robot reportfag loser markjo; it doesn't even know how it just 'diffeetd' its dumb self through Newton's 1st...

Everyone else does though, & is laughing at it.

It is so lost in pompous sock-puppeting reportfag delusion that it can no longer discern between the numbers One & Two.

Let alone understand the definition of the term 'force'.

Poor broken disinfo-thing!

Get me reported with your 28,000 sock-puppets, copy-cat reportfagging psychopath...

REPORT, CENSOR, REPORT & REPEAT!

It's the only way you ever 'win' anything, you repulsive slimeball...

LMFAO - at YOU!!!

As tehEnjynnre is clearly sokarul v2.0

Not funny.  That insult alone should earn you a permaban.  Sokarul is a gigantic idiot.

That insult alone should earn you a permaban.  Sokarul is a gigantic idiot.

Well, you're clearly looking for an excuse, so get your magical ban-hammer wielded, Mighty Thor...

Won't change the Fact that you & socky-boy are the only two members who primp & prance around boasting of being 'unndifeetd' though.

However, it seems Mr. Sock-o has come round in his last couple of posts; think he's got a bit of a man-crush going in fact!

I don't blame him, mind; Legba does have a way with the Ladies...

Must be my shiny new telescope; raown derfers are suckers for telescoperyficationism!

Toodle-pip, 'Engy Baby'!

Quote from: Papa Legba on December 08, 2015, 06:25:47 AM

As tehEnjynnre is clearly sokarul v2.0

Not funny.  That insult alone should earn you a permaban.  Sokarul is a gigantic idiot.

At least he isn't claiming that you're one of my "sock puppets".

BTW Engy, how many 'engineers' do you know that put the word engineer in quotes when referring to themselves?

BTW Engy, how many 'engineers' do you know that put the word engineer in quotes when referring to themselves?

Zero.

Won't change the Fact that you & socky-boy are the only two members who primp & prance around boasting of being 'unndifeetd' though.

Sokarul is wrong nearly all the time.  I, however, am not.

Quote from: Papa Legba on December 08, 2015, 12:19:39 PM

Won't change the Fact that you & socky-boy are the only two members who primp & prance around boasting of being 'unndifeetd' though.

Sokarul is wrong nearly all the time.  I, however, am not.

Should be really easy for you to find when I was last wrong. I'll wait.

Quote from: markjo on December 08, 2015, 08:27:55 AM

If you want to add something productive to the discussion, then please do.  If you just want to shitpost abusive gibberish, then feel free to fuck off.

Bonus LULZ!!!
Look at pathetic robot reportfag loser markjo; it doesn't even know how it just 'diffeetd' its dumb self through Newton's 1st...
Everyone else does though, & is laughing at it.
It is so lost in pompous sock-puppeting reportfag delusion that it can no longer discern between the numbers One & Two.
Let alone understand the definition of the term 'force'.
Poor broken disinfo-thing!
Get me reported with your 28,000 sock-puppets, copy-cat reportfagging psychopath...
REPORT, CENSOR, REPORT & REPEAT!
It's the only way you ever 'win' anything, you repulsive slimeball...
LMFAO - at YOU!!!

If that isn't the rant of someone who knows he lost, I don't know what is!
Is it maybe possible that all this "sock-puppeting" is simply that we globe earthe supporters (more or less) agree on one basic heliocentric globe model.
The FEers do not seem to have a single map the gives correct shapes and spacings of continents. 
Someone pipes up and says that's not the map!  But never comes up with the right one.
Then we find it should be the bi-polar flat map (some FEers seem to finally there really might be a south pole),
but then we get the DFT or DUT or something that relies on magic aether, again I guess because someone else heard "Yes, Virginia!  There really IS a South Pole".  Yes, I know these efforts are to shore up obvious flaws in the simple FE model.
I am sure I have seen someone VERY high up in the FES say the satellites can be fitted into the FE (BUT, I could have misread that!).
Then some Charley says that South Africa is much CLOSER to Australia than the Globe indicates!  Yet, from what I can see of the FE map (you know - the UN one, the Gleason one, the North Polar Azimuthal Equidistant Projection - of the GLOBE) South Africa is much further from Australia than the Globe indicates.

As well as the map problem, there seems to be a little problem of some gravity!  Is it UA?  no, maybe that's stupid!  It it "denspressure" whatever that is - mind you there seem to be numerous little problems with that.  Then we are told that we use Einstein's General Relativity now!  Sure, but it's a bit complicated when doing simple problems - ones where poor old Newton's ideas work quite well.

Then getting back to this OP, where it seems that anyone that believes rockets can work under "extremely low pressure" (loosely called a vacuum) are "satanic sci-fi cultists ..... too satanically brainwashed .... psychos!" etc, etc.
Now, that is a wonderful way to start a rational discussion - I don't think.

No, the FEers are certainly not "sock puppets", some (who they are we all can all guess) have not the faintest ideas of basic physical laws.  Others seem to twist those laws to fit their own ideas.  These FEers certainly don't read from the same book.
I think Papa Legba has effectively shut off any chance of any rational discussion and does himself no credit.

Rowbotham published his "The Earth is not a Globe" some 130 odd years ago and while I do not agree with any of it he was more consistent that the mish-mash of ideas we see from the FES now. 

Maybe FEers should decide among themselves just what ideas they will support, after all numerous holes have been found in the hypotheses they put forward.  After they have a rational model then open it for discussion.  Possibly close off (yes ban somehow) non-FE supporters (like me) from actaully posting in a couple of forums, maybe "Flat Earth Q&A" and "Flat Earth Believers", so that these can contain only "approved" FE material - maps, accepted theories etc.

Maybe I am just spouting rubbish, but I am trying to be a little bit constructive here.

Umm...  Papa Legba isn't an FE'er (or, at least, he hasn't self-identified as one yet).  He's just an obnoxious idiot who thinks that rockets can't work in a vacuum.

You guys crack me up, seriously...

'Self-identifying as a flat earther' - LOL!!!

Wtf is wrong with you all?

Anyhoo; here is some info for people who are not violently insane or shilling for fantasy 'shpayzze-travvul'...

Enjoy!

The combustion chamber of a rocket is open to the near-infinite vacuum of space.

Therefore, no gas can even be meaningfully said to exist within it, let alone combust.

Any gas introduced therein when the pressurised fuel tank is opened will simply expand freely into the enormous, zero-pressure vacuum, following the path of least resistance & doing no work whatsoever.

This will continue for as long as the fuel tank is open to the vacuum, until both exterior & interior pressures are equalised at zero.

It is a beautifully simple concept, fully supported by all the laws of physics, yet you 'round earthers (lol!) just can't seem to grasp it...

Sucks to be you; sucks like a vacuum in fact.

And this too:

You all claim that the recoil of a gun is a valid analogy for how a rocket works in a vacuum.

Here is why it is not:

With a gun you have object A, the mass of the gun; the expanding propellant, P, the gunpowder, sited between them; and object B, the mass of the bullet.

But with a rocket you ONLY have object A, the mass of the rocket,  & the expanding propellant, P, the fuel.

No object B, see?

Thus, you have removed the necessary recoil mass required to produce motion.

But we know a rocket DOES produce motion, don't we?

Ergo, some other mass MUST be taking the place of object B.

& the ONLY possibility for that other mass is the Atmosphere.

Ergo, NO atmosphere, NO motion; rockets CANNOT function in a vacuum.

Q.E.D.

No matter how hard you try to spin it, cultists, every child knows that You cannot Push on Nothing.

No maths required; only common sense.

Then there's the fact that you are all trying desperately to confine this 'debate' to the wrong branch of physics, i.e. Solid Mechanics rather than Fluid Mechanics...

Which is very deceitful, is it not?

Pressure-Gradient Forces, Gas Laws, Fluid Mechanics, Continuum Assumption & Joules Expansion are the areas I suggest neutral readers research.

Now keep up your brainwashing through peer-pressure; a thousand Lies can never equal one Truth.

Newton, Joules & Thomson all agree with me, not you...

So; carry on Lying.

Oh; & what usernames do you employ when trolling youtube?

I know 'rabinoz' is 'rab downunder'...

Still no answer from the rest of you.

How much do u Know of fluid mechanics?

The combustion chamber of a rocket is open to the near-infinite vacuum of space.

Therefore, no gas can even be meaningfully said to exist within it, let alone combust.

Any gas introduced therein when the pressurised fuel tank is opened will simply expand freely into the enormous, zero-pressure vacuum, following the path of least resistance & doing no work whatsoever.

This will continue for as long as the fuel tank is open to the vacuum, until both exterior & interior pressures are equalised at zero.

It is a beautifully simple concept, fully supported by all the laws of physics, yet you 'round earthers (lol!) just can't seem to grasp it...

Sucks to be you; sucks like a vacuum in fact.

Vacuums do not suck. How could they?
When a gas is exposed to a vacuum it nothing changes other than the fact that there is no pressure or interchange of mass from the vacuum.
If you actually understood how fluids behaved you would understand this.

The gas is the combustion chamber cannot exit as quickly as more gas is injected, therefore pressure increases. Not complicated.

You all claim that the recoil of a gun is a valid analogy for how a rocket works in a vacuum.

Here is why it is not:

With a gun you have object A, the mass of the gun; the expanding propellant, P, the gunpowder, sited between them; and object B, the mass of the bullet.

But with a rocket you ONLY have object A, the mass of the rocket,  & the expanding propellant, P, the fuel.

No object B, see?

Thus, you have removed the necessary recoil mass required to produce motion.

But we know a rocket DOES produce motion, don't we?

Ergo, some other mass MUST be taking the place of object B.

& the ONLY possibility for that other mass is the Atmosphere.

Ergo, NO atmosphere, NO motion; rockets CANNOT function in a vacuum.

Fuel, oxidiser and combustion products are all mass B

Then there's the fact that you are all trying desperately to confine this 'debate' to the wrong branch of physics, i.e. Solid Mechanics rather than Fluid Mechanics...

Minor detail but Fluid Mechanics is simply the study of how many solid particles behave globally. The models are simplified by using continuum assumptions. by removing the assumptions you actually return to what is effectively solid mechanics, but this is not used because it is incredibly complicated.

I know 'rabinoz' is 'rab downunder'...

So, you know that, so what?

Now in post that you rant on and on about about how a rocket cannot work in a vacuum, you did not attempt to answer my simple question, so I repeat a bit:
The static thrust expression for a rocket contains two terms:
1) mass flow rate term "(mass flow rate) x (exhaust velocity)" term and the
2) pressure difference term (exhaust pressure - ambient pressure) x (area of exhaust nozzle).

So, since we keep getting more thrust as the ambient pressure falls, at what point does the ambient pressure "magically" turn into a "vacuum" and suddenly make the rocket fail completely!
At sea level the atmospheric pressure is 1 atm.  Does a rocket continue to work till:
 at 10,000 m about 0.240 atm,
 at 20,000 m about 0.057 atm,             (no doubt it works here)
 at 50,000 m about 0.00079 atm,         (pretty sure it works here )
    at 100 km about 6.25e-7 atm,          (pretty sure it works here )
    at 200 km about 3.90e-13 atm and  (should work here - V2 rockets could reach over 300 km when fired straight up)
    at 500 km about 9.53e-32 atm.
remember, the thrust keeps INCREASING as the ambient pressure falls.
So, PLEASE answer this:  where is the magic point where the rocket engine "suddenly" fails to work? 

BTW A vacuum cannot SUCK anything out and IN the combustion chamber and nozzle we do not have a vacuum.

Then there's the fact that you are all trying desperately to confine this 'debate' to the wrong branch of physics, i.e. Solid Mechanics rather than Fluid Mechanics...

Which is very deceitful, is it not?

Not nearly as deceitful as you deliberate misrepresentation of Free Expansion and Newton's laws.

Pressure-Gradient Forces, Gas Laws, Fluid Mechanics, Continuum Assumption & Joules Expansion are the areas I suggest neutral readers research.

I recommend that Papa Legba brush up on Mass Flow.

Mass flow, also known as mass transfer and bulk flow, is the movement of material matter. In physics, mass flow occurs in open systems and is often measured as occurring when moving across a certain boundary characterized by its cross-sectional area and a flow rate. In engineering and biology it may also be a flow of fluids in a tube or vessel of a certain diameter.

When a gas is exposed to a vacuum it nothing changes other than the fact that there is no pressure or interchange of mass from the vacuum.

LOL!!!

The gas is the combustion chamber cannot exit as quickly as more gas is injected, therefore pressure increases.

LOL!!!

Fuel, oxidiser and combustion products are all mass B

LOL!!!

Fluid Mechanics is simply the study of how many solid particles behave globally.

LOL!!!

Plus Wtf?

V2 rockets could reach over 300 km when fired straight up

O Rly?

Plus LOL!!!

IN the combustion chamber and nozzle we do not have a vacuum.

LOL!!!

Plus LOL!!!

Not nearly as deceitful as you deliberate misrepresentation of Free Expansion and Newton's laws.

LOL!!!

I recommend that Papa Legba brush up on Mass Flow.

LOL!!!

In conclusion: LOL-a-pa-LOSERS!!!

Quote from: markjo on December 09, 2015, 05:27:12 AM

I recommend that Papa Legba brush up on Mass Flow.

LOL!!!

Since gasses have mass and they are flowing through the combustion chamber, then Mass Flow seems like a perfectly reasonable topic to discuss.  Not to mention fact that mass flow applies to open systems (like rockets in space) while free expansion applies to closed systems.

Or are you suggesting that gasses don't have mass and don't flow through the combustion chamber? 

Oh, & I forgot this gem:

the thrust keeps INCREASING as the ambient pressure falls.

LOL!!!

You REALLY need to learn how convergent/divergent nozzles work...

To put it simply: Zero back-pressure = Zero thrust.

Good Luck achieving back-pressure in an infinite Zero-pressure Vacuum!

*Yawn!*

Oh; & this:

are you suggesting that gasses don't have mass and don't flow through the combustion chamber?

No, laughing-stock slow-poke creep; I'm suggesting that the mass of the gas will do no work on the rocket itself if it leaves the combustion chamber WHEN THE ROCKET IS IN A VACUUM.

Not hard to understand...

Unless you're shilling for fantasy 'shpayze-travvul' that is.

Just wondering... How much do u think u know about fluid and thermo dynamics?

Quote from: markjo on December 09, 2015, 07:03:52 AM

are you suggesting that gasses don't have mass and don't flow through the combustion chamber?

No, laughing-stock slow-poke creep; I'm suggesting that the mass of the gas will do no work on the rocket itself if it leaves the combustion chamber WHEN THE ROCKET IS IN A VACUUM.

First of all, that is not what free expansion says.  Free expansion says that the total work done is zero once equilibrium has been achieved.  Work can be, and is done while the gas is flowing from high pressure to low pressure.

Secondly, if the gas has mass and velocity as it leaves the combustion chamber (regardless of whether it was the product of combustion or not), that means that the gas has momentum which must be conserved with the rocket system that it's leaving.  You do understand conservation of momentum, don't you?  If not, maybe one of your 'engineer' buddies can explain it to you.

Not hard to understand...

Yet you can't seem to grasp it.

Free expansion says that the total work done is zero once equilibrium has been achieved.

Been here before, slow-poke...

You REALLY need to think about what you just wrote.

Also this:

the gas has momentum which must be conserved with the rocket system that it's leaving.

But the gas is doing Zero work, as there is Zero resistance to it's motion.

So of course the momentum of the gas is conserved; because it's transferring Zero work between itself & the rocket...

It is simply Expanding, Freely, into the Zero-pressure vacuum of 'space'!

How many Zeros do we need to add up here before you will finally comprehend that YOU CANNOT GET SOMETHING OUT OF NOTHING?

*Yawn!*

Lol


Work is force times distance.



Lol


Where does resistance come into play?


Lol

Quote from: markjo on December 09, 2015, 07:32:26 AM

Free expansion says that the total work done is zero once equilibrium has been achieved.

Been here before, slow-poke...

You REALLY need to think about what you just wrote.

Also this:

Quote from: markjo on December 09, 2015, 07:32:26 AM

the gas has momentum which must be conserved with the rocket system that it's leaving.

But the gas is doing Zero work, as there is Zero resistance to it's motion.

So of course the momentum of the gas is conserved; because it's transferring Zero work between itself & the rocket...

It is simply Expanding, Freely, into the Zero-pressure vacuum of 'space'!

How many Zeros do we need to add up here before you will finally comprehend that YOU CANNOT GET SOMETHING OUT OF NOTHING?

*Yawn!*

What about portion of the gas that is travelling away from the opening to vacuum. Work must be done on the gas to change its direction. By newtons third the gas then does work on the container.

Quote from: markjo on December 09, 2015, 07:32:26 AM

Free expansion says that the total work done is zero once equilibrium has been achieved.

Been here before, slow-poke...

You REALLY need to think about what you just wrote.

Are you saying that there is no difference between "total work done" and "work being done at any given instant"?

Quote from: markjo on December 09, 2015, 07:32:26 AM

the gas has momentum which must be conserved with the rocket system that it's leaving.

But the gas is doing Zero work, as there is Zero resistance to it's motion.

Incorrect.  The fact that a mass is moving from the storage tank to the combustion chamber under pressure means that work is being done.

So of course the momentum of the gas is conserved; because it's transferring Zero work between itself & the rocket..

Work and momentum are not the same thing.

It is simply Expanding, Freely, into the Zero-pressure vacuum of 'space'!

Actually, it's expanding into the combustion chamber first, then it expands into space.  Or are you saying that gas does not expand to fill all available space (like an evacuated chamber in between the fuel supply and outer space)?

How many Zeros do we need to add up here before you will finally comprehend that YOU CANNOT GET SOMETHING OUT OF NOTHING?

I'm not saying that you can.  It's just that you keep looking where the work isn't being done and keep missing where the work is being done.