People on skateboards.

Here we go again...

Equations are the ONLY thing you can TRULY trust in the world.

Thus speaks a man with no friends or family.

Now please make your point, luckypoodle...

If you have one, that is?

am i correct in saying that according to u using bernoulli's equation one can accelerate the fluid without force interaction between the gas and the body?

And the Gibberish continues...

Everything turns into a farce with you, don't it, time-wasting luckypoodle?

Get back in your clown-kennel & get used to being ignored again.

Now; let's return to the post full of awkward questions that you are still desperately trying to shitpost down the memory-hole:

LOL!!  How does nothing (a vacuum) enter something (a combustion)?

LOL!!! How do you get a gas to combust in a vacuum?

So how does the gas accelerate from zero to speed of free expansion if no work is done?

Through converting its pressure potential energy into molecular kinetic energy; thus, no 'force' is applied to the gas & no work is done, as the gas is expanding freely into a vacuum without meeting resistance.

But apparently you can get nothing to go into something.

This doesn't mean anything; typical markjo.

As for your silly J2 engine; by all means let us examine its 'combustion chamber', nozzle, etc...

It is a joke.

Just like your entire shitpost.

Also, I notice rab downunder is still avoiding addressing this blatant troll-post:

Object A is the Rocket + unburnt fuel, Object F is the burning fuel, and Object B is the thousands of pounds of fuel being ejected out the back.

Note that he is trying to tell us that Objects F & B are the exact same thing.

Here's a hint for you, rab: One, Two, Three.

Remember that!

Not One, Two, Two...

But One, Two, Three.

I believe there is a puppet vampire called Count Von Count on Sesame Street who may be able to help you further should you require it?

Lastly, note that sokarul is avoiding addressing this important point:

Quote from: sokarul on December 16, 2015, 11:50:12 AM

No. Why does it need to expand?

Because you said this:

Quote from: sokarul on December 16, 2015, 10:17:03 AM

The ball is the fuel/oxidizer exhaust.

Whilst markjo said this:

Quote from: markjo on December 14, 2015, 09:02:26 AM

the expanding (burning) propellant is ONE object using stored energy to create a force by expanding against a SECOND object, i.e. the combustion chamber.

So, if the ball is NOT expanding, then your whole analogy FAILS.

Running away from the ludicrous contradictions at the heart of your arguments is quite the habit with you shpayze-trolls isn't it?

And the Gibberish continues...

And still papa legba does not know how high a rocket CAN go!  What is the use of all your hand waving and shouting impossible, when we all know a rocket does work up to a very high altitude - and still you don't know just when it STOPS WORKING!
It is absolutely useless only knowing what will not work, when you do not know what will work.  How do you hope to accomplish anything if all you know is what cannot be done!
See what can be done by amateurs! Amateur rocket team launches rocket to 73.1 miles see https://rocketry.wordpress.com/2014/08/18/amateur-rocket-team-launches-rocket-to-73-1-miles/.
So was that launch a fake? 

You mean the rocket launched by Ky Michaelson, Hollywood stuntman & special effects expert?

The guy who set up the company 'Hollywood Stunt Masters' in 1969, same year as teh munn landing?

The guy whose website, www.the-rocketman.com contains no technical data whatsoever on his amazing feats?

Yeah; think I'm quite happy in calling bullshit on that...

*Yawn!*

Btw, you learned to count to three yet?

One, Two, THREE.

THREE - not Two again, but THREE.

Okay, slow-poke?

Why does the ball need to expand?

Why does the ball need to expand?

Because you said the Ball represented the Fuel.

And the Fuel is Expanding.

So, if the Ball is NOT Expanding then your analogy FAILS.

Dumbass.

Quote from: sokarul on December 17, 2015, 06:11:34 AM

Why does the ball need to expand?

Because you said the Ball represented the Fuel.

And the Fuel is Expanding.

So, if the Ball is NOT Expanding then your analogy FAILS.

Dumbass.

You should discuss this in a scientific forum.

Quote from: Papa Legba on December 17, 2015, 06:29:41 AM

Quote from: sokarul on December 17, 2015, 06:11:34 AM

Why does the ball need to expand?

Because you said the Ball represented the Fuel.

And the Fuel is Expanding.

So, if the Ball is NOT Expanding then your analogy FAILS.

Dumbass.

You should discuss this in a scientific forum.

Why?, so more of you can round up and start going into a frenzy?

It's getting discussed here because people can see the reality of stuff against the clear fabrication of the mainstream indoctrinated model that the brainwashed people like yourself has accepted unconditionally.

You should discuss this in a scientific forum.

Why?

I'm not the dumbass who thinks a man on a skateboard proves 'shpayze-flyte'.

And I'm not the dumbass who said this:

Man is the rocket.
The ball is the fuel/oxidizer exhaust.
His arms are like the reaction to apply a force to a mass to get acceleration.

The dumbass who did say that was sokarul.

And he is now doing all he can to avoid facing up to his dumbassery.

Aided by fellow clown derfers like inquisitive, as ever...

Now; back to sokaruls dumbass analogy:

Why does the ball need to expand?

Because you said the Ball represented the Fuel.

And the Fuel is Expanding.

So, if the Ball is NOT Expanding then your analogy FAILS.

Dumbass.

Quote

'Literally explained' what?  I asked for you to provide the quote.

After I had already explained it to you. Like I said, you think you can prove scientific arguments.

If you notice, I asked you to provide the quote where I claim to have proven General Relativity.  I'm waiting.

Quote

Quote

Strange, you figured it out just fine.

I have 3 kids; I'm used to deciphering gibberish.

I care so much.

How sweet!  That you care makes me feel all warm and fuzzy inside. 

Quote

Quote

But no, chemists you work with would not write papers on their results

Really?  Then why do I have a stack of reports written by chemists on the results of experiments I have asked for?  Maybe only real chemists write reports.

Results would be worthless without more information. Like I said, reports contain more parts of the scientific method. Stop editing out parts of quotes. It's dishonest.

So you do agree that chemists would write reports on experiments performed.  After you said that the chemists I work with would not write papers on their results.  Wow.  This is discount chemist sokarul at his finest. 

Quote

Quote

How many of them write their papers on iPhones?

I would assume none.  Are you trying to blame you smart phone for your inability to properly convey a message?  That's lame.

No, I'm blaming he typos on it.

So you must also blame forks for making people fat?  I'm pretty sure your iPhone is overheating trying to correct for your gibberish.

Quote

Quote

It's funny though, you changes from saying I’m always wrong to saying I suck at everything.

I gave you too much credit apparently.

No, you just claim I'm always wrong and then post typos.

Typos don't count as being wrong?  In my line of work, typos in a document could lead to disastrous results during a missile launch/mission or, at the very least, the complete rejection of the document.  But I guess being a discount chemist means you don't get tasked to do important things...

Quote

So, I'm still waiting for that quote...

Pay attention. You think you can prove an argument using general relativity. This would imply general relativity has been proven. Understand yet?

http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=64594.msg1726202#msg1726202

So, I noticed you didn't post the quote where I claimed to have proven General Relativity.  Why is that?  Could this be the latest example of you being wrong?

In my line of work, typos in a document could lead to disastrous results during a missile launch/mission

LOL!!!

Just when I think this forum can't sink any further into farce, along comes 'engy baby' to up the slapstick bullshit stakes...

Who's your 'rokkit teknishun', engy baby?

'Hollywood Stunt Master' & O.G 'Rocketman' Ky Michaelson?

Tell him to keep an eye out for them Disaster-Typos...

LMFAO!!!

Quote from: TheEngineer on December 17, 2015, 07:34:22 AM

In my line of work, typos in a document could lead to disastrous results during a missile launch/mission

LOL!!!

Just when I think this forum can't sink any further into farce, along comes 'engy baby' to up the slapstick bullshit stakes...

Who's your 'rokkit teknishun', engy baby?

'Hollywood Stunt Master' & O.G 'Rocketman' Ky Michaelson?

Tell him to keep an eye out for them Disaster-Typos...

LMFAO!!!

Papa, missiles do work (they're in the atmosphere). As far as I see TheEngineer is not talking about space rockets (oxymoron).

Still troubling this Engineer is helping to kill other human beings, that's for sure...

Don't you start...

I'm sick of engy baby's 'I know things you don't cos my job is soopah-sekrit & speshul' schtick.

It's clear from his words he was trying to spam 'shpayze-misshuns', or 'nookular eye-see-bee-ems', or some other such sci-fi fantasy bullshit...

He's a fraud, pure & simple; I've been waiting for him to push his luck for a while now (because con-men ALWAYS push it too far) & he's Busted.

He's still a mod mind; if he wants to wield his pathetic ban-hammer like the paper Thor he is, then whatever...

But he'll always know that Legba saw right through his fake-ass self before he did.

Cos Legba sees ALL voodoo!

Toodle-pip, Losers!

Quote from: markjo on December 16, 2015, 10:22:53 PM

LOL!!  How does nothing (a vacuum) enter something (a combustion)?

LOL!!! How do you get a gas to combust in a vacuum?

Once you introduce fuel and oxidizer into a finite combustion chamber, then there is no longer a vacuum in the combustion chamber, is there?

Quote from: markjo on December 16, 2015, 10:22:53 PM

So how does the gas accelerate from zero to speed of free expansion if no work is done?

Through converting its pressure potential energy into molecular kinetic energy; thus, no 'force' is applied to the gas & no work is done, as the gas is expanding freely into a vacuum without meeting resistance.

Converting potential energy to kinetic energy is pretty much the definition of work. 

Quote from: markjo on December 16, 2015, 10:22:53 PM

But apparently you can get nothing to go into something.

This doesn't mean anything; typical markjo.

It's about as meaningful as "Even if a convergent/divergent nozzle could prevent the vacuum entering the combustion chamber..."

As for your silly J2 engine; by all means let us examine its 'combustion chamber', nozzle, etc...

It is a joke.

Wow, what a thorough and exhaustive examination. 

Okay, slow-poke?

Still can't answer a simple question!

Who's your 'rokkit teknishun', engy baby?

Uh...me.

Well, technically, I'm a missile engineer (hence the name).

Still troubling this Engineer is helping to kill other human beings, that's for sure...

Well, as I've stated in the past, I am a war profiteer.  I have, however, moved from cannons to rockets and missiles.

Quote from: Papa Legba on December 17, 2015, 11:41:42 AM

Who's your 'rokkit teknishun', engy baby?

Uh...me.

Well, technically, I'm a missile engineer (hence the name).

So you're a missle engineer and a pilot? What type of pilot are you? If you are a pilot then why you use globe navigations?

So you're a missle engineer and a pilot?

Yes.  It is possible to be both.

Quote from: Gaia_Redonda on December 17, 2015, 11:51:57 AM

Still troubling this Engineer is helping to kill other human beings, that's for sure...

Well, as I've stated in the past, I am a war profiteer.  I have, however, moved from cannons to rockets and missiles.

Quite a career move; from killing people to killing people.

Quite a career move; from killing people to killing people.

Do all missiles kill people? 

Quote from: Gaia_Redonda on December 17, 2015, 04:10:36 PM

Quite a career move; from killing people to killing people.

Do all missiles kill people?

No, some might target other missiles or drones. So actually you're saving a lot of lives; you're a hero!

Quote from: Luke 22:35-38 on December 17, 2015, 03:50:07 PM

So you're a missle engineer and a pilot?

Yes.  It is possible to be both.

So what type of pilot are you?

Quote from: sokarul on December 16, 2015, 08:02:17 PM

Quote

'Literally explained' what?  I asked for you to provide the quote.

After I had already explained it to you. Like I said, you think you can prove scientific arguments.

If you notice, I asked you to provide the quote where I claim to have proven General Relativity.  I'm waiting.

Pay attention. You think you can prove an argument using general relativity. This would imply general relativity has been proven. Understand yet?

So you do agree that chemists would write reports on experiments performed.  After you said that the chemists I work with would not write papers on their results.  Wow.  This is discount chemist sokarul at his finest. 

But no, chemists you work with would not write papers on their results. That would be part of them, but there's a few more parts of the scientific method they would include.

 

So you must also blame forks for making people fat?  I'm pretty sure your iPhone is overheating trying to correct for your gibberish.

You like to jump to random conclusions.

Typos don't count as being wrong?  In my line of work, typos in a document could lead to disastrous results during a missile launch/mission or, at the very least, the complete rejection of the document.  But I guess being a discount chemist means you don't get tasked to do important things...

More jumping to conclusions.

So, I noticed you didn't post the quote where I claimed to have proven General Relativity.  Why is that?  Could this be the latest example of you being wrong?

Pay attention. You think you can prove an argument using general relativity. This would imply general relativity has been proven. Understand yet?

So I noticed that you still have not provided a quote.  Why would that be...?

No, some might target other missiles or drones. So actually you're saving a lot of lives; you're a hero!

You are welcome.

So what type of pilot are you?

My class rating is Airplane, Single Engine, Land.

Quote from: Luke 22:35-38 on December 17, 2015, 05:06:14 PM

So what type of pilot are you?

My class rating is Airplane, Single Engine, Land.

So either you're a bush pilot or a fighter pilot.

So either you're a bush pilot or a fighter pilot.

Both of those would be awesome, but no.  Flying is but a hobby for me.  A very, very expensive hobby.