I'll draw a diagram sometime tomorrow showing you what I mean about how the rocket really works. The diagram may be crude but it'll make a point from my side and it's entirely up to you how you view it.
I'll be waiting.
But remember, this is mainly focusing on a vacuum. So don't draw a diagram of how a rocket works in the atmosphere, draw/indicate exactly what happens with that setup of a rocket in a vacuum (or as you call it extreme low pressure).
You either refuse to understand it or can't. Which one is it?
Or, we understand it and understand that it is wrong as it contradicts reality and/or itself.
We grasp your hypothesis quite well. At least some of us do. We just understand it is wrong and does not describe reality at all.
Understanding your model contradicts reality doesn't mean we don't understand your model nor that we aren't even trying to grasp it.
However your continued dismissal of those who realise your theory is wrong, especially by avoiding questions and just saying people don't understand does show that you aren't even trying to make a coherent model and don't care if your model contradicts itself.
How about you stop dismissing people as not understanding your model and instead try and justify your claims.
You can call it buoyancy if you want as long as you leave out the fictional stuff like gravity. If you can't then I simply refute it and use my own version.
You mean leave out the real stuff like gravity. If we use reality then you will reject, not refute. There is a big difference between reject and refute.
Like I said, after all this time you don't understand it.
No, after all this time, you are still unable to make a coherent model and instead you are still contradicting yourself, and we understand that.
If you think we are wrong, please explain why an object surrounded by air falls, but an object surrounded by air doesn't fall.
Notice the problem? We sure can. In both cases, they are surrounded by air, but you get 2 wildly different results.
There cannot be any free space where nothing exists in it. It's impossible and makes no sense at all.
Again, all we have for that is your baseless assertion.
Why is it impossible?
Why doesn't it make any sense at all?
Objects have a position in 3D space (or you can even say 4D space-time).
If you have an object in one position, and another object in another position, with no object in the position between them, then there is free space between them.
All free space is is free space that isn't occupied by an object.
Sure you can appeal to the quantum level to appeal to virtual particles and probability functions, but that isn't what is being discussed here, as that doesn't affect the size of the molecule.
Friction & vibration are movements. Movements require space within which to move. Ergo, there is space between molecules.
While movement requires space, it doesn't require that space to be free as it can just push objects out of the way.
Nothing is added to the beer as it is pressure sealed.
Yet when freezing process the moecule (in the conventional physics terms) expand, and eventually the bottle fails.
Hes proving that space is a thing.
While some may argue over exactly what constitutes the size of the molecule, for the simple level, the molecule remains the same size.
The big issue for water is the nature of the hydrogen bonding.
Liquid water (at least when warm) has roughly 3.5 hydrogen bonds on each molecule. But solid water has 4.
The necessary orientation of the hydrogen bonds means the solid water needs to adopt a more open crystal structure, with significant voids, while the liquid water is more disordered and fills the voids.
However this is a good example, as there is no reason for the molecules to expand when they cool, as for almost everything else they would need to shrink as they cool.
Water, between 4 degrees and 0 degrees, would need to expand in denpressure. While conventional physics/chemistry explains it so well.
The same applies to other negative thermal expansion coefficient materials.
Denspressure needs them to magically expand when cooling.
But for conventional physics, these are materials which have open structures, such that when they are cold and rigid there are large voids as the linear connections between atoms keeps them spaces apart. But when they are heated up and begin to vibrate, these linear connections become bent and allow the atoms to begin to fill the voids and shrink.