People on skateboards.

Every time you don't response to my evidence you concede it.

You have not provided evidence.  You've provided conjecture.  Please post a quote.  The fact that you haven't, but are still pushing your 'evidence' line is pathetic.

When you want to wake up from your fantasy world I'll be around waiting.

When you want to wake up from your fantasy world I'll be around waiting.

Jesus Christ, now socky-boy's hitting on everyone too...

What is it with you Clown Derfers?

I have a new argument for Papa Legba to ignore.

LOL!!!

You see what you did there?

Not 'logic'; not 'facts'; not 'science'; no, you have only 'arguments'.

So yes, I will ignore it if I choose, & rightly so.

My degree was Electrical

Funny, that, cos so was Rayzor's...

& we all know whose sock-puppet Rayzor was.

You are all completely useless, aintcha?

Toodle-pip, Losers!

Quote from: rabinoz on December 21, 2015, 07:12:11 PM

My degree was Electrical

Funny, that, cos so was Rayzor's...
& we all know whose sock-puppet Rayzor was.
You are all completely useless, aintcha?
Toodle-pip, Losers!

In you don't know there is more than one Electrical Engineer in the world!  Then again such knowledge would be beyond you, just like how have no idea how high SpaceX's rocket might before it runs out of air to push on.  LOL
BTW, just why are rocket engines used instead of the far more fuel efficient jet engines (Yes, I know there is more than one reason!).
But still NO answers - none at all!  "Oh look mummy!  Papa Legba is the only one in step!"

As SpaceX's 'rokkits' do not exist outside a computer, the question of how high they go is somewhat moot.

The rest of your post did not make any sense whatsoever; like ausGeoff, Rayzor, Soulblood, ZennerOne & all the other Australian electrical engineers this forum is so improbably flooded with, you seem to be permanently drunk...

Or you're yet another creepy clown-derfer who just comes here to hit on flatties?

Perhaps FES could incorporate a chat-line/dating forum to accommodate you & your perverted brethren?

As SpaceX's 'rokkits' do not exist outside a computer, the question of how high they go is somewhat moot.

I suppose everyone, Papa included of course, is going to watch these SpaceX's 'rokkits' fail when they reach the newly recognised Papa Legba Rokkit Limit Altitude.  I guess you are keeping it a close secret so that the results won't be biassed.  Mind you Papa you could earn yourself a fortune telling Space Exploration Technologies Corporation your now famous calculations.  They would be forever in you debt for saving them all this time and money.

Funny how numerous people observed the launch shown on the Youtube video: " class="bbc_link" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">.  Especially supposedly that "Amateur Rocket Into Space Proves Flat Earth" - well maybe not.

Especially supposedly that "Amateur Rocket Into Space Proves Flat Earth" - well maybe not.

I already dealt with the fake GoFast rocket launch days ago; look:

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...

Seems you're too drunk to remember...

As for your employers SpaceX; total bullshit too.

Now crawl back into your bottle & give us all a rest from your alcoholic ravings.

Quote from: rabinoz on December 22, 2015, 04:04:24 AM

Especially supposedly that "Amateur Rocket Into Space Proves Flat Earth" - well maybe not.

I already dealt with the fake GoFast rocket launch days ago; look:

Quote from: Papa Legba on December 17, 2015, 04:44:44 AM

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...

Seems you're too drunk to remember...

As for your employers SpaceX; total bullshit too.

Now crawl back into your bottle & give us all a rest from your alcoholic ravings.

And the satellites it launched, how did they get into space?

Quote from: rabinoz on December 22, 2015, 04:04:24 AM

Especially supposedly that "Amateur Rocket Into Space Proves Flat Earth" - well maybe not.

I already dealt with the fake GoFast rocket launch days ago; look:

Quote from: Papa Legba on December 17, 2015, 04:44:44 AM

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...

Seems you're too drunk to remember...

As for your employers SpaceX; total bullshit too.

Now crawl back into your bottle & give us all a rest from your alcoholic ravings.

YOU already dealt with the fake GoFast rocket launch days ago.  I'm sure they are shaking in there boots that the World Famous Rikkity Rocket Specialist Dr Papa Legba has dealt with them.  WOW, big deal.
You really are giving Flat Earthers a bad name.  Pity, some of you can debate reasonably without pouring out invective.  Keep up the good work.
BTW, I'm retired so no-one pays me - pity!

I'm not really sure what's going on now; are you still hitting on me?

You seem terribly upset about something, anyway; would you like to talk about it?

Quote from: markjo on December 21, 2015, 07:07:52 PM

I have a new argument for Papa Legba to ignore.

LOL!!!

You see what you did there?

Not 'logic'; not 'facts'; not 'science'; no, you have only 'arguments'.

So yes, I will ignore it if I choose, & rightly so.

But of course you will rightly choose to ignore anything that's inconvenient to your irrational rationale.

Quote from: Papa Legba on December 21, 2015, 04:16:32 PM

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.

Quote from: markjo on December 21, 2015, 03:04:57 PM

What about liquids?  Can liquids exist in a vacuum?  Can two hypergolic liquids be sprayed together in a vacuum and spontaneously combust producing combustion gasses?

But of course you will rightly choose to ignore anything that's inconvenient to your irrational rationale.

That didn't mean anything, markjo.

Care to try again, this time avoiding Orwellian Double-speak?

I know it's hard for you...

But give it a go, eh?

Quote from: markjo on December 22, 2015, 05:25:42 AM

But of course you will rightly choose to ignore anything that's inconvenient to your irrational rationale.

That didn't mean anything, markjo.

Care to try again, this time avoiding Orwellian Double-speak?

I know it's hard for you...

But give it a go, eh?

How's this?

You ignore anything that contradicts your opinion.

For example:

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.

What about liquids?  Can liquids exist in a vacuum?  Can two hypergolic liquids be sprayed together in a vacuum and spontaneously combust producing combustion gasses?

When you want to wake up from your fantasy world I'll be around waiting.

I don't know what it is you are waiting for, but I'm still waiting for a quote.

  Can two hypergolic liquids be sprayed together in a vacuum and spontaneously combust producing combustion gasses?

Oh, look; I already answered this months ago!

Quote from: markjo on October 27, 2015, 07:15:33 AM

Just out of curiosity, does that include hypergolic propellants that ignite on contact when sprayed into a combustion chamber?

LOL!!!

What does it matter?

If the combustion chamber is open to the vacuum (which I'm still not sure you agreed upon or not, as you are such a shitposting snake... Luckily we all know damn well it IS open to the vacuum anyway), then any gas produced will simply expand, freely, following the path of least resistance & doing no work.

No matter how you twist & turn, all the laws of physics tell us that a gas-powered rocket simply cannot function in a vacuum.

Because YOU CANNOT PUSH ON NOTHING.

*Yawn!*

Do you recall me urging you to get tested for Alzheimers, markjo?

Well, no, of course you don't...

Because your Alzheimers made you forget I did so.

It is a terrible disease.

Quote from: markjo on December 22, 2015, 09:06:29 AM

  Can two hypergolic liquids be sprayed together in a vacuum and spontaneously combust producing combustion gasses?

Oh, look; I already answered this months ago!

Quote from: Papa Legba on October 27, 2015, 07:38:20 AM

Quote from: markjo on October 27, 2015, 07:15:33 AM

Just out of curiosity, does that include hypergolic propellants that ignite on contact when sprayed into a combustion chamber?

LOL!!!

What does it matter?

Sorry, but that isn't a valid response.  A simple yes or no will suffice.

Sorry, but that isn't a valid answer.

Well nothing is to you, as you've already admitted you're only here to argue.

Look:

I have a new argument for Papa Legba

*Yawn!*

Quote from: markjo on December 22, 2015, 01:35:42 PM

Sorry, but that isn't a valid answer.

Well nothing is to you, as you've already admitted you're only here to argue.

verb (used without object), argued, arguing.
1.  to present reasons for or against a thing:
He argued in favor of capital punishment.
2.  to contend in oral disagreement; dispute:
The senator argued with the president about the new tax bill.

Yes, I'm here to argue, which is more than I can say for you. 

Now, would you care to give a proper answer to the question of hypergolic liquids combining in a vacuum and producing exhaust gasses?

Now, would you care to give a proper answer to the question of hypergolic liquids combining in a vacuum and producing exhaust gasses?

I already did, months ago.

I just showed you it, remember?

That Alzheimers is shocking, markjo; get treatment asap!

Quote from: markjo on December 22, 2015, 01:47:48 PM

Now, would you care to give a proper answer to the question of hypergolic liquids combining in a vacuum and producing exhaust gasses?

I already did, months ago.

No, you avoided answering the question.

It doesn't matter isn't a proper answer to a question of whether or not something is possible. 

Yes or no is a proper answer to such a question.

Well, you didn't object to my answer months ago, so what has changed since?

The laws of physics, somehow?

Is Free Expansion not a real thing any more?

And just listen to yourself here:

Yes or no is a proper answer to such a question.

LOL!!!

The chutzpah!

Well, you didn't object to my answer months ago, so what has changed since?

You avoided answering the question then and you're avoiding answering it now, so I guess nothing has changed.

The laws of physics, somehow?

Nope.  Laws of physics are still the same and they still say that rockets can work in a vacuum just fine.

Is Free Expansion not a real thing any more?

Of course free expansion is real, it just isn't relevant.

And just listen to yourself here:

Quote from: markjo on December 22, 2015, 02:16:20 PM

Yes or no is a proper answer to such a question.

LOL!!!

The chutzpah!

ROTFLMAO!!!

You're one to talk about chutzpah.

So, can hypergolic liquids produce combustion gasses in a vacuum or not?  It really isn't that hard of a question.

Phase diagrams are pretty easy to read; gas cannot exist in space. At near-zero Pressures and Temperatures everything turns solid or superfluid (lightest gases like H and He).

All "proof" rockets "work" is made with computers and staged film (pre-computers).

Do not take NASA "science" for real science.

Phase diagrams are pretty easy to read; gas cannot exist in space. At near-zero Pressures and Temperatures everything turns solid or superfluid (lightest gases like H and He).

All "proof" rockets "work" is made with computers and staged film (pre-computers).

Do not take NASA "science" for real science.

How do gasses act in the high pressure and high temperature environment of a rocket's combustion chamber?

How do gasses act in the high pressure and high temperature environment of a rocket's combustion chamber?

You just keep forgetting about that vacuum, don't you markjo?

We keep reminding you, but your mind is clearly incapable of retaining the information...

Yet another common symptom of Alzheimers.

Quote from: markjo on December 22, 2015, 06:00:47 PM

How do gasses act in the high pressure and high temperature environment of a rocket's combustion chamber?

You just keep forgetting about that vacuum, don't you markjo?

We keep reminding you, but your mind is clearly incapable of retaining the information...

Yet another common symptom of Alzheimers.

And we keep reminding you that the combustion chamber is not a vacuum. Gas entering the combustion chamber can only exit at a certain finite rate, and if the amount entering is greater or equal than leaving then you will has mass inside the chamber and therefore pressure.

Here is a post from a few months back where mainframes showed he did not even know what the general physics definition of the term 'evacuated' is:

I mean; look at this garbage:

Quote from: Mainframes on October 28, 2015, 06:25:30 AM

Quote

Free expansion is an irreversible process in which a gas expands into an insulated evacuated chamber. It is also called Joule expansion.

It is not that gas cannot do work in a vacuum. It is that gas does no work when expanding into an evacuated chamber because all of the effect net to zero.

What, exactly, is in that 'evacuated chamber' that the gas does no work whilst expanding into?

Could it be a vacuum?

Why yes; yes it IS a vacuum.

Thus, mainframes completely contradicts himself in one sentence!

& what 'because all of the net effect to zero' means is anybody's guess...

He does this all the time, yet expects us to believe he has a masters in science...

LOL!!!

Cool story bro...

His latest post shows that he has learnt nothing since.

Also note that, for all their talk of the combustion chambers of shpayze-rokkit enjynns such as the J2, the clown derfers seem rather reluctant to actually show us any of these miraculous devices...

This is because, if they did, it would be obvious that they were entirely open to the infinite vacuum of space, & could not possibly work as claimed.

*Yawn!*

Quote from: markjo on December 22, 2015, 06:00:47 PM

How do gasses act in the high pressure and high temperature environment of a rocket's combustion chamber?

You just keep forgetting about that vacuum, don't you markjo?

No, I didn't forget about the vacuum.  You're the one who keeps forgetting that gas has mass and therefore any acceleration of that gas results in a force .

No, I didn't forget about the vacuum.

Yes, you did.

You have to, or your fraud-rokkits can't function in your fraud-shpayze.

What's next?

Oh, this:

gas has mass and therefore any acceleration of that gas results in a force .

Fantastic - The Force!

Just like Star Wars eh?

So, anyhoo; you seem to have learned Newton's 2nd Law: F=ma...

Good! That's progress.

Now, simply extrapolate your gas-with-force into a Resistance-less vacuum environment, apply Newton's 3rd Law & Bingo!

Rockets do not work in Space.

Thangyew & Goodnight!