HAPPY HOAX ANNIVERSARY!!! (Rockets can't fly in a vacuum)

  • 3179 Replies
  • 702489 Views
*

sceptimatic

  • Flat Earth Scientist
  • 30076
  • +3/-4
Re: HAPPY HOAX ANNIVERSARY!!! (Rockets can't fly in a vacuum)
« Reply #2490 on: December 20, 2019, 08:37:40 AM »
Don't tell me that walls hold pressure to allow explosions to lift a rocket when we're told a number of 3000 (yes, three thousand) tonne rockets supposedly launched in the 60's....etc.

If the pressure is unbearable for the "3000 tonne rocket", then what lifts it off the ground?
The internal to external expansion of gases against the atmosphere becoming more compressed and resisting it. This is what the rocket sits on....and no I don't mean 3000 tonne so called space rockets. They don't exist.

Your word salad means nothing.
"Internal to external expansion" means that the pressure inside is higher than the pressure outside.

Clearly it does mean something. You managed to get it.


Quote from: Macarios
Saturn V used Rocketdyne F-1 engine, which had chamber pressure of 70 bar (69 atm).
At the Earth surface the difference is 68 atm (external pressure is 1 atm), and up there is 69 atm (external pressure is virtually zero).

Lower pressure difference at the surface means slower exhaust and lower thrust.

In reality, the thrust of F-1 at surface is 6770 kN and in vacuum 7770 kN.
That is because in the atmospere the exhaust speed is 2.58 km/sec compared to 2.98 km/sec in vacuum.

Now multiply that with the mass of the exhaust and the number of engines and tell us that
the rocket can push all that without force, regardless of the presence of the atmosphere around.

And that force can get away without reaction force back to the rocket?

1 bar of the atmospheric pressure sitting outside can hold the rocket,
and 70 bar of the chamber pressure pushing through the nozle can't?
:)


If a rocket had an engine like this F1 it would not work.
The Saturn V had five Rocketdyne F-1 engines in the first stage - hence the name!
So prove "it would not work" because the Saturn V obviously did work! Look:


Quote from: sceptimatic
This engine is just a gimmick.
A real rocket would act like a Firework.
None of this throttle garbage.
What total crap you dream up!
It was throttled by controlling the fuel flow rate. What's so strange about that?

Quote from: sceptimatic
Just ignite and immediate full thrusting burn until fuel emptied in short order.
Garbage! The F-1 engines in the Saturn V provided thrust for 165 seconds (2 min 45 secs).
How about you draw a diagram showing exactly how a rocket works.
Just point out what happened in thew diagram for that rocket to lift off and accelerate.

Because all I ever see you people do is bring up a load of old flannel that explains nothing, so now's your chance.

Explain it in enough detail to show exactly what's happening.

*

sceptimatic

  • Flat Earth Scientist
  • 30076
  • +3/-4
Re: HAPPY HOAX ANNIVERSARY!!! (Rockets can't fly in a vacuum)
« Reply #2491 on: December 20, 2019, 08:40:51 AM »
Do you get outside? I mean seriously?
Do you?

*

sceptimatic

  • Flat Earth Scientist
  • 30076
  • +3/-4
Re: HAPPY HOAX ANNIVERSARY!!! (Rockets can't fly in a vacuum)
« Reply #2492 on: December 20, 2019, 08:43:00 AM »


You are yet to show how rockets work with atmosphere rather than just a lot of pressure.
As has already been pointed out, hovercraft use the atmosphere, as in they use fans/rotors which move it.
Rockets don't.

Rockets do. Everything does, it's why everything works as it does.

The only issue with it all is the bullcrap we are fed with space rockets and what not.

*

Bullwinkle

  • The Elder Ones
  • 21053
  • +2/-1
  • Standard Idiot
Re: HAPPY HOAX ANNIVERSARY!!! (Rockets can't fly in a vacuum)
« Reply #2493 on: December 20, 2019, 10:28:11 AM »

Rockets do. Everything does, it's why everything works as it does.


     science





*

Yes

  • 604
  • +0/-0
Re: HAPPY HOAX ANNIVERSARY!!! (Rockets can't fly in a vacuum)
« Reply #2494 on: December 20, 2019, 11:09:38 AM »
How about you draw a diagram showing exactly how a rocket works.
https://www.google.com/search?q=diagram+showing+exactly+how+a+rocket+works
Then click on any of the links at all.  Any of them.  This isn't controversial physics.

Come on, man.  You don't need to live in ignorance.
Signatures are displayed at the bottom of each post or personal message. BBCode and smileys may be used in your signature.

?

Themightykabool

  • 13103
  • +58/-79
Re: HAPPY HOAX ANNIVERSARY!!! (Rockets can't fly in a vacuum)
« Reply #2495 on: December 20, 2019, 12:09:55 PM »
Like i said.
Conventional physics is readily and widely welk docunented and doesnt require us to display it to you here.
You say your theory works.
Please provide the diagram showing what part of the rocket you think sits on the super compressed gas on gas fight below.

*

rabinoz

  • 26528
  • +0/-0
  • Real Earth Believer
Re: HAPPY HOAX ANNIVERSARY!!! (Rockets can't fly in a vacuum)
« Reply #2496 on: December 20, 2019, 01:15:08 PM »
You are yet to show how rockets work with atmosphere rather than just a lot of pressure.
As has already been pointed out, hovercraft use the atmosphere, as in they use fans/rotors which move it.
Rockets don't.

Rockets do. Everything does, it's why everything works as it does.
Nope, wrong again!
Rockets don't need the atmosphere to work, gravitation doesn't need the atmosphere to work, hence everything does not need the atmosphere to work.

And, whatever you might dream up, reality does not need your approval, Mr SkeptiManiac.

Whatever you claim, it is impossible to deduce how everything works from "common sense".
Deducing how out how everything works requires a tremendous amount of research and careful measurement.
One person, however smart he thinks he is, simply cannot do that - get used to that.

We simply have to rely on the work of others.

Quote from: sceptimatic
The only issue with it all is the bullcrap we are fed with space rockets and what not.
Nope!
All the bullcrap comes from little people like you who think they are smart enough to be able to work everything out by common sense - neither you nor anybody else can do they.

If that wasn't true why would there be such a plethora of flat Earth "theories" none of which agree with each other.
Take for example the flat Earth "theories" presented in:
      TFES.org: The Flat Earth Wiki,
      Sandokhan's Advanced Flat Earth Theory and
      Your flat Denpressure Earth Theory described somewhere.
These are all vastly different so cannot all be correct - and after looking into them it seems far more likely that none are correct.

*

Macarios

  • 2094
  • +1/-0
Re: HAPPY HOAX ANNIVERSARY!!! (Rockets can't fly in a vacuum)
« Reply #2497 on: December 20, 2019, 01:47:00 PM »
How about you draw a diagram showing exactly how a rocket works.
Just point out what happened in thew diagram for that rocket to lift off and accelerate.

Because all I ever see you people do is bring up a load of old flannel that explains nothing, so now's your chance.

Explain it in enough detail to show exactly what's happening.

Rocket pushes the mass of the exhaust backwards with the force.
Reaction to that force pushes the remaining mass of the rocket rocket forward.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Same things happens always: action and reaction.

Wheels of a ground vehicle push road backwards, the reaction pushes the vehicle forward.
Ship propeller (or wheel at Mississipi, or paddles on boat) pushes water backwards, the reaction pushes the ship forward.
Airplane propeller pushes the air backwards, the reaction pushes the airplane forward.
Rocket pushes exhaust backwards, the reaction pushes the rocket forward.

For more details you have tons of messages in this thread, and some videos at YouTube...
I don't have to fight about anything.
These things are not about me.
When one points facts out, they speak for themselves.
The main goal in all that is simplicity.

?

Themightykabool

  • 13103
  • +58/-79
Re: HAPPY HOAX ANNIVERSARY!!! (Rockets can't fly in a vacuum)
« Reply #2498 on: December 20, 2019, 02:24:31 PM »
He doesnt believe and will dismiss it all away with a simple hand wave.

Problem though is he cant replace it with anything.
Thsi is what YOU PEOPLE need to realise and focus.
Dont let him deflect.

Wheres the diagram scepti?
What part of the rocket is sitting on the gas-on-gas fight?

?

Themightykabool

  • 13103
  • +58/-79
Re: HAPPY HOAX ANNIVERSARY!!! (Rockets can't fly in a vacuum)
« Reply #2499 on: December 20, 2019, 02:29:13 PM »
Here you go, like I promised.
Just where is the reaction/leverage in this?

What is all the gas pushing against, or do you think gas can just magically push with no leverage at all?
If that is the case, what is wrong with the arrows being the other way around and pushing the rocket?

i.e. something like this:


As you have repeatedly said, you need leverage/resistance to move.
So what is the gas using? Your arrows can't all be in one direction.

So just like always you deflect and don't bother providing an explanation at all.
So thanks for yet again showing your promises are worthless.
A bunch of arrows, ignoring key parts of your model, doesn't make an explanation.

My question remains unanswered, what is the gas using as leverage?

Ok, there you go.


We have exiting gas
And we have resisting atmosphere.
What part is pushing on the actual rocket (the black lines surrounding the red)?

*

sceptimatic

  • Flat Earth Scientist
  • 30076
  • +3/-4
Re: HAPPY HOAX ANNIVERSARY!!! (Rockets can't fly in a vacuum)
« Reply #2500 on: December 20, 2019, 11:23:32 PM »
How about you draw a diagram showing exactly how a rocket works.
https://www.google.com/search?q=diagram+showing+exactly+how+a+rocket+works
Then click on any of the links at all.  Any of them.  This isn't controversial physics.

Come on, man.  You don't need to live in ignorance.
They don't explain anything as to what's happening to get that rocket up.
It's just a load of mumbo jumbo.
How about you draw a simple diagram making absolutely sure to point to what's happening.
Are you scared to do it or have no clue?

*

sceptimatic

  • Flat Earth Scientist
  • 30076
  • +3/-4
Re: HAPPY HOAX ANNIVERSARY!!! (Rockets can't fly in a vacuum)
« Reply #2501 on: December 20, 2019, 11:26:06 PM »
Like i said.
Conventional physics is readily and widely welk docunented and doesnt require us to display it to you here.
You say your theory works.
Please provide the diagram showing what part of the rocket you think sits on the super compressed gas on gas fight below.
Of course it doesn't require you to display anything. You're quite happy to copy and paste whatever is being argued against, as your so called proof, except these diagrams and what not, on rockets supposedly working without the aid of atmosphere, do not show anything that shows them to work without it.

If you think it does then point it out.

*

sceptimatic

  • Flat Earth Scientist
  • 30076
  • +3/-4
Re: HAPPY HOAX ANNIVERSARY!!! (Rockets can't fly in a vacuum)
« Reply #2502 on: December 20, 2019, 11:36:06 PM »

Rockets don't need the atmosphere to work, gravitation doesn't need the atmosphere to work, hence everything does not need the atmosphere to work.
Wrong.

Quote from: rabinoz

And, whatever you might dream up, reality does not need your approval, Mr SkeptiManiac.
It certainly doesn't. All we do need is for those who bypass reality to actually give us back the reality. That's all that's needed.
However, if that happens then we would have very little news to go on to play with our heads, from war propaganda to silly space adventures that get sillier every day.

Quote from: rabinoz

Whatever you claim, it is impossible to deduce how everything works from "common sense".
Deducing how out how everything works requires a tremendous amount of research and careful measurement.
One person, however smart he thinks he is, simply cannot do that - get used to that.
We simply have to rely on the work of others.
Your problem is, you think I go against everything. I don't.
I just don't trust a lot of stuff and also think a lot of stuff is told in an alternate way to the reality.
They still work in reality but the explanations of how and why are hidden behind a smokescreen, in my opinion.



Quote from: rabinoz

If that wasn't true why would there be such a plethora of flat Earth "theories" none of which agree with each other.
Take for example the flat Earth "theories" presented in:
      TFES.org: The Flat Earth Wiki,
      Sandokhan's Advanced Flat Earth Theory and
      Your flat Denpressure Earth Theory described somewhere.
These are all vastly different so cannot all be correct - and after looking into them it seems far more likely that none are correct.
Yep, including a spinning globe and many many more theories.

Finding which one is correct will take more than a tiny human with basic craft to fathom.

What's left?

It's all about putting it all together with the experiments (however small) we can all do to gain some kind of potential needle sized realism in a massive haystack of hypotheticals and basic lies.

*

sceptimatic

  • Flat Earth Scientist
  • 30076
  • +3/-4
Re: HAPPY HOAX ANNIVERSARY!!! (Rockets can't fly in a vacuum)
« Reply #2503 on: December 20, 2019, 11:42:36 PM »
Rocket pushes the mass of the exhaust backwards with the force.
Reaction to that force pushes the remaining mass of the rocket rocket forward.
What reaction?
Explain exactly what's happening, because that's as sketchy as all hell.


Quote from: Macarios
Wheels of a ground vehicle push road backwards, the reaction pushes the vehicle forward.
Using atmosphere in order to do so.
Quote from: Macarios
Ship propeller (or wheel at Mississipi, or paddles on boat) pushes water backwards, the reaction pushes the ship forward.
Using water and atmosphere in order to do so.
Quote from: Macarios
Airplane propeller pushes the air backwards, the reaction pushes the airplane forward.
Rocket pushes exhaust backwards, the reaction pushes the rocket forward.
Using atmosphere in order to do so. You're answering your own questions to be fair.

Quote from: Macarios
For more details you have tons of messages in this thread, and some videos at YouTube...
There are no details on what I'm arguing against with how so called space rockets work.

*

sceptimatic

  • Flat Earth Scientist
  • 30076
  • +3/-4
Re: HAPPY HOAX ANNIVERSARY!!! (Rockets can't fly in a vacuum)
« Reply #2504 on: December 20, 2019, 11:43:59 PM »
He doesnt believe and will dismiss it all away with a simple hand wave.

Problem though is he cant replace it with anything.
Thsi is what YOU PEOPLE need to realise and focus.
Dont let him deflect.

Wheres the diagram scepti?
What part of the rocket is sitting on the gas-on-gas fight?
I'd like to see one from your side but nobody seems to have a clue.
It's just too easy to copy and paste something that explains nothing.
Use your own mind and show me what's happening.

I think I'm dealing with parrots.

*

sceptimatic

  • Flat Earth Scientist
  • 30076
  • +3/-4
Re: HAPPY HOAX ANNIVERSARY!!! (Rockets can't fly in a vacuum)
« Reply #2505 on: December 20, 2019, 11:47:02 PM »
Here you go, like I promised.
Just where is the reaction/leverage in this?

What is all the gas pushing against, or do you think gas can just magically push with no leverage at all?
If that is the case, what is wrong with the arrows being the other way around and pushing the rocket?

i.e. something like this:


As you have repeatedly said, you need leverage/resistance to move.
So what is the gas using? Your arrows can't all be in one direction.

So just like always you deflect and don't bother providing an explanation at all.
So thanks for yet again showing your promises are worthless.
A bunch of arrows, ignoring key parts of your model, doesn't make an explanation.

My question remains unanswered, what is the gas using as leverage?

Ok, there you go.


We have exiting gas
And we have resisting atmosphere.
What part is pushing on the actual rocket (the black lines surrounding the red)?
Imagine compressed gas exiting a container but as it does so, someone manages to push it right back at it, trying to push it back in....what happens?


?

Themightykabool

  • 13103
  • +58/-79
Re: HAPPY HOAX ANNIVERSARY!!! (Rockets can't fly in a vacuum)
« Reply #2506 on: December 21, 2019, 12:12:03 AM »
So there is pressure from the outside, pushing on the exiting, which pushes on the inside of the tube pushing the rocket up.

Thata the point weve been trying to make way back on pg50 when you joined this party.
And the same point from the intercon't missile thread.

?

Themightykabool

  • 13103
  • +58/-79
Re: HAPPY HOAX ANNIVERSARY!!! (Rockets can't fly in a vacuum)
« Reply #2507 on: December 21, 2019, 12:12:48 AM »
Here you go, like I promised.
Just where is the reaction/leverage in this?

What is all the gas pushing against, or do you think gas can just magically push with no leverage at all?
If that is the case, what is wrong with the arrows being the other way around and pushing the rocket?

i.e. something like this:


As you have repeatedly said, you need leverage/resistance to move.
So what is the gas using? Your arrows can't all be in one direction.

So just like always you deflect and don't bother providing an explanation at all.
So thanks for yet again showing your promises are worthless.
A bunch of arrows, ignoring key parts of your model, doesn't make an explanation.

My question remains unanswered, what is the gas using as leverage?

Ok, there you go.


We have exiting gas
And we have resisting atmosphere.
What part is pushing on the actual rocket (the black lines surrounding the red)?
Imagine compressed gas exiting a container but as it does so, someone manages to push it right back at it, trying to push it back in....what happens?

And why do i ha e to imagine?
Finish your drawing.
Draw it properly.
Make it clear to all.

*

rabinoz

  • 26528
  • +0/-0
  • Real Earth Believer
Re: HAPPY HOAX ANNIVERSARY!!! (Rockets can't fly in a vacuum)
« Reply #2508 on: December 21, 2019, 12:31:27 AM »

Rockets don't need the atmosphere to work, gravitation doesn't need the atmosphere to work, hence everything does not need the atmosphere to work.
Wrong.
Incorrect. The fact that rockets don't need any atmosphere has been explained numerous times and demonstrated.
Don't blame us for your inability or unwillingness to understand it.

Quote from: sceptimatic
Quote from: rabinoz

And, whatever you might dream up, reality does not need your approval, Mr SkeptiManiac.
It certainly doesn't. All we do need is for those who bypass reality to actually give us back the reality. That's all that's needed.
However, if that happens then we would have very little news to go on to play with our heads, from war propaganda to silly space adventures that get sillier every day.
Just look in a mirror to learn one of those "who bypass reality".
But the whole point is that the shape of the Earth is not a recent theory and predates any of your claimed "silly space adventures that get sillier every day" by millennia!

Quote from: sceptimatic
Quote from: rabinoz

Whatever you claim, it is impossible to deduce how everything works from "common sense".
Deducing how out how everything works requires a tremendous amount of research and careful measurement.
One person, however smart he thinks he is, simply cannot do that - get used to that.
We simply have to rely on the work of others.
Your problem is, you think I go against everything. I don't.
You reject all of physics that goes against the hypotheses you dream up yet those hypotheses have no useful applications.

Whenever you are asked to make a calculation based on those hypotheses you refuse because you can't.
But the real physics of gases and the atmosphere allows the design of aircraft and to predict just how they will fly and perform.

Quote from: sceptimatic
I just don't trust a lot of stuff and also think a lot of stuff is told in an alternate way to the reality.
They still work in reality but the explanations of how and why are hidden behind a smokescreen, in my opinion.
Yes, it's all "your opinion" because you refuse to research the available material on these things that you claim are "are hidden behind a smokescreen".

But most of the theories about gases are based on the Gas Laws that were initially developed from experimental work as far back as 350 years (Boyle's Law). Back there the reasons for these laws were not known and that came later with the kinetic theory of gases, developed during the 1800s.

Quote from: sceptimatic
Quote from: rabinoz

If that wasn't true why would there be such a plethora of flat Earth "theories" none of which agree with each other.
Take for example the flat Earth "theories" presented in:
      TFES.org: The Flat Earth Wiki,
      Sandokhan's Advanced Flat Earth Theory and
      Your flat Denpressure Earth Theory described somewhere.
These are all vastly different so cannot all be correct - and after looking into them it seems far more likely that none are correct.
Yep, including a spinning globe and many many more theories.
Nope, it does not include the rotating Globe.
That was developed gradually over millennia and for some 1800 years the Earth was thought "For truly it is an orb placed in the centre of the universe", the Venerable Bede, around 700 AD.

The Earth's being a slowly rotating was developed over the period from the late 1500s till the early 1700s.

Quote from: sceptimatic
Finding which one is correct will take more than a tiny human with basic craft to fathom.
That's already been done and that is why there is such a plethora of flat Earth models - none can possibly work because the Earth is not flat!
A flat Earth is quite impossible.
One easily reason for this impossibility is that the real Earth has been circumnavigated in enough different directions that those doing it would have to meet the edge that any flat Earth must have.

Quote from: sceptimatic
What's left?
Simply admitting that it is impossible to develop a flat Earth model that "works".

Quote from: sceptimatic
It's all about putting it all together with the experiments (however small) we can all do to gain some kind of potential needle sized realism in a massive haystack of hypotheticals and basic lies.
The experiments have been done and there were plenty done many centuries ago. You really should  study up on the history of the shape of the Earth.

And you simply have to, sooner or later, simply face the fact that when it comes to the basic shape and movement of the Earth there is no "massive haystack of hypotheticals and basic lies".

There are still plenty of unknowns but on Earth these are simply very small details or inaccessible locations - such as deep underground.

*

sceptimatic

  • Flat Earth Scientist
  • 30076
  • +3/-4
Re: HAPPY HOAX ANNIVERSARY!!! (Rockets can't fly in a vacuum)
« Reply #2509 on: December 21, 2019, 12:40:41 AM »
So there is pressure from the outside, pushing on the exiting, which pushes on the inside of the tube pushing the rocket up.

Thata the point weve been trying to make way back on pg50 when you joined this party.
And the same point from the intercon't missile thread.
Of course there's pressure from the outside and if this is the so called point you're trying to make then your rocket does not work in your vacuum.

*

sceptimatic

  • Flat Earth Scientist
  • 30076
  • +3/-4
Re: HAPPY HOAX ANNIVERSARY!!! (Rockets can't fly in a vacuum)
« Reply #2510 on: December 21, 2019, 12:42:09 AM »


And why do i ha e to imagine?
Finish your drawing.
Draw it properly.
Make it clear to all.
I will as soon as you or someone like you makes it clear as to how your rocket works in your vacuum.
Surely it can't be hard to do with you lot beating on about it like you are.

*

sceptimatic

  • Flat Earth Scientist
  • 30076
  • +3/-4
Re: HAPPY HOAX ANNIVERSARY!!! (Rockets can't fly in a vacuum)
« Reply #2511 on: December 21, 2019, 12:43:24 AM »

Rockets don't need the atmosphere to work, gravitation doesn't need the atmosphere to work, hence everything does not need the atmosphere to work.
Wrong.
Incorrect. The fact that rockets don't need any atmosphere has been explained numerous times and demonstrated.
Don't blame us for your inability or unwillingness to understand it.

Quote from: sceptimatic
Quote from: rabinoz

And, whatever you might dream up, reality does not need your approval, Mr SkeptiManiac.
It certainly doesn't. All we do need is for those who bypass reality to actually give us back the reality. That's all that's needed.
However, if that happens then we would have very little news to go on to play with our heads, from war propaganda to silly space adventures that get sillier every day.
Just look in a mirror to learn one of those "who bypass reality".
But the whole point is that the shape of the Earth is not a recent theory and predates any of your claimed "silly space adventures that get sillier every day" by millennia!

Quote from: sceptimatic
Quote from: rabinoz

Whatever you claim, it is impossible to deduce how everything works from "common sense".
Deducing how out how everything works requires a tremendous amount of research and careful measurement.
One person, however smart he thinks he is, simply cannot do that - get used to that.
We simply have to rely on the work of others.
Your problem is, you think I go against everything. I don't.
You reject all of physics that goes against the hypotheses you dream up yet those hypotheses have no useful applications.

Whenever you are asked to make a calculation based on those hypotheses you refuse because you can't.
But the real physics of gases and the atmosphere allows the design of aircraft and to predict just how they will fly and perform.

Quote from: sceptimatic
I just don't trust a lot of stuff and also think a lot of stuff is told in an alternate way to the reality.
They still work in reality but the explanations of how and why are hidden behind a smokescreen, in my opinion.
Yes, it's all "your opinion" because you refuse to research the available material on these things that you claim are "are hidden behind a smokescreen".

But most of the theories about gases are based on the Gas Laws that were initially developed from experimental work as far back as 350 years (Boyle's Law). Back there the reasons for these laws were not known and that came later with the kinetic theory of gases, developed during the 1800s.

Quote from: sceptimatic
Quote from: rabinoz

If that wasn't true why would there be such a plethora of flat Earth "theories" none of which agree with each other.
Take for example the flat Earth "theories" presented in:
      TFES.org: The Flat Earth Wiki,
      Sandokhan's Advanced Flat Earth Theory and
      Your flat Denpressure Earth Theory described somewhere.
These are all vastly different so cannot all be correct - and after looking into them it seems far more likely that none are correct.
Yep, including a spinning globe and many many more theories.
Nope, it does not include the rotating Globe.
That was developed gradually over millennia and for some 1800 years the Earth was thought "For truly it is an orb placed in the centre of the universe", the Venerable Bede, around 700 AD.

The Earth's being a slowly rotating was developed over the period from the late 1500s till the early 1700s.

Quote from: sceptimatic
Finding which one is correct will take more than a tiny human with basic craft to fathom.
That's already been done and that is why there is such a plethora of flat Earth models - none can possibly work because the Earth is not flat!
A flat Earth is quite impossible.
One easily reason for this impossibility is that the real Earth has been circumnavigated in enough different directions that those doing it would have to meet the edge that any flat Earth must have.

Quote from: sceptimatic
What's left?
Simply admitting that it is impossible to develop a flat Earth model that "works".

Quote from: sceptimatic
It's all about putting it all together with the experiments (however small) we can all do to gain some kind of potential needle sized realism in a massive haystack of hypotheticals and basic lies.
The experiments have been done and there were plenty done many centuries ago. You really should  study up on the history of the shape of the Earth.

And you simply have to, sooner or later, simply face the fact that when it comes to the basic shape and movement of the Earth there is no "massive haystack of hypotheticals and basic lies".

There are still plenty of unknowns but on Earth these are simply very small details or inaccessible locations - such as deep underground.
Have you took over from JackBlack or are you twins?

?

Themightykabool

  • 13103
  • +58/-79
Re: HAPPY HOAX ANNIVERSARY!!! (Rockets can't fly in a vacuum)
« Reply #2512 on: December 21, 2019, 12:52:15 AM »
So there is pressure from the outside, pushing on the exiting, which pushes on the inside of the tube pushing the rocket up.

Thata the point weve been trying to make way back on pg50 when you joined this party.
And the same point from the intercon't missile thread.
Of course there's pressure from the outside and if this is the so called point you're trying to make then your rocket does not work in your vacuum.


Did you typo "out" or did you not see the bold underlined point i was trying to make?

?

Themightykabool

  • 13103
  • +58/-79
Re: HAPPY HOAX ANNIVERSARY!!! (Rockets can't fly in a vacuum)
« Reply #2513 on: December 21, 2019, 12:55:01 AM »


And why do i ha e to imagine?
Finish your drawing.
Draw it properly.
Make it clear to all.
I will as soon as you or someone like you makes it clear as to how your rocket works in your vacuum.
Surely it can't be hard to do with you lot beating on about it like you are.

You already hand waved it away.
What you havent done is shown what is physically in contact with te water rocket to push it up.

Outside air - water - exiting gas - ??? - rocket.

Fill in the blank.

*

sceptimatic

  • Flat Earth Scientist
  • 30076
  • +3/-4
Re: HAPPY HOAX ANNIVERSARY!!! (Rockets can't fly in a vacuum)
« Reply #2514 on: December 21, 2019, 02:59:23 AM »
So there is pressure from the outside, pushing on the exiting, which pushes on the inside of the tube pushing the rocket up.

Thata the point weve been trying to make way back on pg50 when you joined this party.
And the same point from the intercon't missile thread.
Of course there's pressure from the outside and if this is the so called point you're trying to make then your rocket does not work in your vacuum.


Did you typo "out" or did you not see the bold underlined point i was trying to make?
Nothing pushes on the inside of the tube, everything is done (as work) externally from the tube, hence why I said what I said earlier.

There's enough stuff out there to observe, test and repeat to know that anything from inside a container allowed to be released from that container, will follow a flow, whether it's a liquid/fluid/gas.

I simply can't understand how anyone can believe a rocket can burn fuel inside of it to kick it's own arse into the sky or into so called fantasy space. It really does beggar belief...for those who have given plenty of thought to it, I mean.

For those that simply take stuff on face value......well.....I have zero issue with that.

*

sceptimatic

  • Flat Earth Scientist
  • 30076
  • +3/-4
Re: HAPPY HOAX ANNIVERSARY!!! (Rockets can't fly in a vacuum)
« Reply #2515 on: December 21, 2019, 03:00:45 AM »


And why do i ha e to imagine?
Finish your drawing.
Draw it properly.
Make it clear to all.
I will as soon as you or someone like you makes it clear as to how your rocket works in your vacuum.
Surely it can't be hard to do with you lot beating on about it like you are.

You already hand waved it away.
What you havent done is shown what is physically in contact with te water rocket to push it up.

Outside air - water - exiting gas - ??? - rocket.

Fill in the blank.
If I have time today I might just knock up a rough drawing explaining everything from my side.
I suggest you do the same from your side.

*

rabinoz

  • 26528
  • +0/-0
  • Real Earth Believer
Re: HAPPY HOAX ANNIVERSARY!!! (Rockets can't fly in a vacuum)
« Reply #2516 on: December 21, 2019, 03:03:49 AM »
Have you took taken over from JackBlack or are you twins?
No and no.

*

rabinoz

  • 26528
  • +0/-0
  • Real Earth Believer
Re: HAPPY HOAX ANNIVERSARY!!! (Rockets can't fly in a vacuum)
« Reply #2517 on: December 21, 2019, 03:14:00 AM »
I will as soon as you or someone like you makes it clear as to how your rocket works in your vacuum.
  • That's been done over and over! It's needs nothing more than Newton's 2nd Law of Motion, force = mass x acceleration.
    Surely you accept that bit of basic physics.

  • It's not "our vacuum"!
    A perfect vacuum might not be possible but even on Earth a pressure so low that you could never tell the difference is quite possible.

*

sceptimatic

  • Flat Earth Scientist
  • 30076
  • +3/-4
Re: HAPPY HOAX ANNIVERSARY!!! (Rockets can't fly in a vacuum)
« Reply #2518 on: December 21, 2019, 03:32:09 AM »
I will as soon as you or someone like you makes it clear as to how your rocket works in your vacuum.

That's been done over and over! It's needs nothing more than Newton's 2nd Law of Motion, force = mass x acceleration
Surely you accept that bit of basic physics.
It's what creates the force and how it's created to accelerate a mass.
Just simply using that equation means absolutely nothing with your fantasy space rocket unless you absolutely prove it works or at least explain how and why it works.

Quote from: rabinoz

It's not "our vacuum"!
A perfect vacuum might not be possible but even on Earth a pressure so low that you could never tell the difference is quite possible.

Nope. The pressure can be so low but it's not so low as to be indistinguishable from your vacuum. Why?
Because your vacuum does not and cannot exist but an extreme low pressure can exist.

And that's all you can work on, unless you want to carry on with arguing for a space vacuum that means a nothing which would mean it literally wouldn't exist.

*

rabinoz

  • 26528
  • +0/-0
  • Real Earth Believer
Re: HAPPY HOAX ANNIVERSARY!!! (Rockets can't fly in a vacuum)
« Reply #2519 on: December 21, 2019, 03:44:09 AM »
I simply can't understand how anyone can believe a rocket can burn fuel inside of it to kick it's own arse into the sky or into so called fantasy space.
It's easy!
 Burning fuel and oxidised (making up the propellant) in the combustion chamber (not in a vacuum) increases the pressure of that propellant tremendously.
That propellant usually starts as liquid hydrogen, methane or RP-1 (kerosene) as the fuel and liquid oxygen as the oxidised.
This burnt propellant ends up as a very high temperature gas and so is under a very high pressure (up to say 300 times normal atmospheric pressure).
As the burnt propellant escapes through the throat and bell of the nozzle it expands greatly in volume so decreasing the temperature and increasing the velocity to thousands of metres per second.

The force needed to accelerate around 1000 kg of propellant from zero to thousands of km/sec is the force that produces the thrust of the rocket.
And all that burning, expansion and accelerating is within the rocket before it's reach the vacuum of space.

So I fail to see why you find it impossible to grasp.
 
Quote from: sceptimatic
It really does beggar belief...for those who have given plenty of thought to it, I mean.
What really does beggar belief for me is why it is all difficult to accept and I have given the matter plenty of thought, believe me!