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

I notice you are still ignoring the very simple question which shows you are wrong.

Again, what is the gas using as leverage/resistance/foundation?
What is it pushing against (which must in turn be pushed)?

Gas, like I've already told you many times and even drew you the diagram showing you. Surely you can't be this ignorant.

Quote from: sceptimatic on November 10, 2019, 02:21:56 PM

It's not dissipated before it leaves the rocket.

The vast majority of it is. That is the entire point of the nozzle.

The entire point of a nozzle is to allow a controlled expansion to ensure the rocket creates enough compression directly beneath it by that expansion to effect vertical movement off of it, in atmosphere.

But if it wasn't, that means just outside the rocket you have high pressure gas. Why can't the rocket push off that like it pushes off the atmosphere?

It does push off the atmosphere.
If that gas was allowed out of the nozzle against extreme low pressure, or your fictional vacuum of space then that gas would simply follow a one way street into that with no reaction to the rocket.

The water, as an analogy for air, would be required to push off something in your model. The window provides far more resistance than the air, and thus should push the hose up a lot more.
But that isn't observed.
Why?
Is it because your model is entirely wrong?

Understand that a water hose can push a person back a good distance.
It could, if strong enough, knock down a heavy barrier.
It also pushes back by equal reaction any dense mass holding the hose....IF, that dense mass is less than the force applied out of that hose by pressure release by expansion onto that water.

Quote from: sceptimatic on November 10, 2019, 10:00:45 PM

Quote from: rabinoz on November 10, 2019, 04:44:55 PM

If the rocket nozzle is correctly designed there is no "extreme low pressure we call space" inside it!
There might be almost 3000 kg/sec of gas exiting that nozzle at 2570 m/s (for the SpaceX Merlin 1D engine).
So there is no chance of a vacuum in there.

Go and learn something about the design of the correct profile of that rocket nozzle. Learning a bit about hypersonic gas flow wouldn't hurt either.

A rocket nozzle would be as pointless as a chocolate fireguard in your space or extreme low pressure.

In other words you have no knowledge of the design of the expanding bell of a rocket engine nozzle nor of hypersonic gas flow, I realised that long ago.

But whether you like it or not the propagation velocity of disturbances is the speed of sound.
"Rockets can't fly in a vacuum" aficionado, Cikljamas, "proved" that earlier.

The velocity of the exhaust gas in a properly designed rocket nozzle is everywhere greater than Mach 1.
Hence the gas inside the nozzle cannot "know" about the vacuum outside. So there is not "vacuum" inside the nozzle
Learn about de Laval nozzles used in steam turbines - almost the same theory!

Don't give me this "cannot know what's outside" nonsense.

Let's put this simply.

A rocket with a nozzle in atmosphere with a released gas to expand into that nozzle will be expanding into atmospheric pressure inside that nozzle which is basically encased with the nozzle structure around it.
Expand internal cases into that and it gets pushed down by the super expansion from inside by super decompression from inside, into less compressed atmosphere until it hits it and then that atmosphere becomes super compressed.
Action and reaction.
This creates a gas fight of compression to expansion to compression and back to expansion, which would be the end product of dissipating exhaust...not to me mixed up with thrust doing work which is the super expansion.
The nozzle ensured that burn is controlled to get the best expansion to compression ration directly under that rocket to gain the maximum action/reaction of gas on gas. Or gas on atmospheric gas or fluid or whatever you want to think of it as.

Ok, now transfer that to an extreme low pressure external environment but with exactly the same rocket set up.

You're wasting your time having a nozzle at all. It would be pointless because only the direct opening before that nozzle would be the expansion point against absolutely zero resistance externally.
The re gas from the rocket simply follows a line to full gas expansion in itself which is followed by every gas molecule behind it against zero resistance to it, meaning a super fast dissipation of that gas, leaving the rocket exactly where it was and the gas a dormant line  of frozen expansion due to zero ability to expand or contract and thus, create zero vibration.....equals.....FREEZE.

Gas, like I've already told you many times and even drew you the diagram showing you.

So the gas inside the rocket can act as leverage?
Do you understand what that means?
That means the rocket can push against it.
That means rockets work in vacuum.

That is the key part you are ignoring.
You need to explain what is there that the gas can push off that the rocket can't.
Surely you can't be this ignorant.

The entire point of a nozzle is to allow a controlled expansion to ensure the rocket creates enough compression directly beneath it

No it isn't.
It has nothing to do with compression beneath it.
The entire point of a nozzle is to expand the gas to utilise as much of the pressure of the reaction as possible.
If you eject high pressure gas, you are wasting potential energy.

If that gas was allowed out of the nozzle against extreme low pressure, or your fictional vacuum of space then that gas would simply follow a one way street into that with no reaction to the rocket.

Why?
Make up your mind.
If that high pressure gas is right outside the rocket, the rocket should be able to push off it.
How come now it magically goes on a one way street?
Why does only a vacuum make it a one way street?

It also pushes back by equal reaction any dense mass holding the hose.

Yes, just like a rocket. Water is forced one way, the hose is forced the other.
But once the water is out, it can't do anything more.

Let's put this simply.

Yes, lets put this simply.
Gas has mass.
The gas and the rocket interact.
That makes the gas go one way and the rocket go the other.

Any magic you invoke to stop the rocket moving works equally well for the gas.

Either the gas doesn't move, or the rocket does.

Or another way:
Pressure pushes outwards equally in all directions.
This means the rocket is pushed by the pressurised gas.
The only way to stop it is to contain the gas.
If the gas is not contained then the pressure will be unbalanced.

So yet again, the rocket works.

No need for any expansion or atmosphere nonsense.

Quote from: sceptimatic on November 11, 2019, 01:39:15 AM

Gas, like I've already told you many times and even drew you the diagram showing you.

So the gas inside the rocket can act as leverage?
Do you understand what that means?
That means the rocket can push against it.
That means rockets work in vacuum.

Ha!

Quote from: sceptimatic on November 11, 2019, 01:39:15 AM

Gas, like I've already told you many times and even drew you the diagram showing you.

So the gas inside the rocket can act as leverage?
Do you understand what that means?
That means the rocket can push against it.
That means rockets work in vacuum.

That is the key part you are ignoring.
You need to explain what is there that the gas can push off that the rocket can't.

The rocket does none of the pushing. The gases do all the work. The rocket simply sits atop of the gases, along for the ride.
It also means you have to have two gases interacting with each other. A clash if you like, in opposite directions.
My diagram shows you this.
It means no rocket in a fantasy space vacuum.

Quote from: sceptimatic on November 11, 2019, 01:39:15 AM

The entire point of a nozzle is to allow a controlled expansion to ensure the rocket creates enough compression directly beneath it

No it isn't.
It has nothing to do with compression beneath it.
The entire point of a nozzle is to expand the gas to utilise as much of the pressure of the reaction as possible.
If you eject high pressure gas, you are wasting potential energy.

The gas ejects itself once you breach the container.
And from that point on you're using what was potential energy and is now active energy.

Quote from: sceptimatic on November 11, 2019, 01:39:15 AM

If that gas was allowed out of the nozzle against extreme low pressure, or your fictional vacuum of space then that gas would simply follow a one way street into that with no reaction to the rocket.

Why does only a vacuum make it a one way street?

Because the fantasy vacuum offers zero resistance

Quote from: sceptimatic on November 11, 2019, 01:51:08 AM

Let's put this simply.

Yes, lets put this simply.
Gas has mass.
The gas and the rocket interact.
That makes the gas go one way and the rocket go the other.

Any magic you invoke to stop the rocket moving works equally well for the gas.
Either the gas doesn't move, or the rocket does.

The rocket is moved as it sits atop the gas fight.

Or another way:
Pressure pushes outwards equally in all directions.

Only when contained.

This means the rocket is pushed by the pressurised gas.

Yep, from outside, not inside and it's only sitting atop that gas.

The only way to stop it is to contain the gas.
If the gas is not contained then the pressure will be unbalanced.

So yet again, the rocket works.

No need for any expansion or atmosphere nonsense.

Absolutely a need or you have nothing that works, let alone a rocket...but never a fantasy space rocket.

Quote from: Themightykabool on November 09, 2019, 04:44:27 AM

Your claim it requires sponges of air expanding out and stacking up.

I'm using sponges as a basic and simple analogy to save all the complicated stuff that would get lost.
The weird bit is in people not grasping the basic stuff but maybe that's deliberate or simply because people refuse to stray from their comfort zone.

Quote from: Themightykabool

In conventional science, Water rockets use air pressure to shoot water out the back end causing a mass flow, which launches the rocket.
The very mass flow that a nasa rocket uses to get into space and the very mass flow that works in a vacuum.
You claim this is incorrect.

It's incorrect in how we're told it works.

Quote from: Themightykabool

So
Under your "correct" version of science.
Compressed sponge air expands against outside non-compressed sponge air and these all stack up against the foundation to generate liftoff.

Quote from: Themightykabool

But by that theory, in a water rocket, if you take out the water, and fill it with all air, it should go higher -because we can fit way more sponges.
Yet it doesn't.
Why not?
Looks like you don't have an answer.

Dense mass of the water being pushed by the compressed air in the way I mentioned earlier about how it decompresses as gas molecule on gas molecule or sponge on sponge. (Remember?)

This dense mass of water is able to super compress the atmosphere or sponges directly under it and around that water and it compresses enough for the force placed on it to now decompress right back and create a foundation. A gas foundation on that stack.

The floor is simply a foundation in itself holding the entirety of the atmosphere.

Quote from: Themightykabool

In the fireman water machine video.
At 1:06 the nozzle goes through a window.
Again, your theory relies on a foundation to stack the sponges against.
Why didn't the nozzle jump when passing through the window?
The window provided a raised foundation.
If you climbed a set of stairs do you go up?
Why can't this nozzle go up a set of stairs?

What do you think's holding the actual nozzle and hose up as it goes through that window?

Through all your nonsesne - the conclusion is it is NOT weird that we cant accept your denP.
It is perfectly normal given that you are wrong.


Lets take the recent nonsense and bring it back to this post.
The water rocket.
Your claim is the water super compresses which allows it to work.

So lets switch it up back to the med ball.
A gun-bullet.
Solid "exhaust".
Is the bullet or med ball being "super compressed"?

Lets take the recent nonsense and bring it back to this post.
The water rocket.
Your claim is the water super compresses which allows it to work.

No, that is not my claim, at all.
Gas or atmosphere super compresses, depending on the force applied or contained and that containment being breached.
The water pressure is an end product of that compressed gas released as a super expanding gas pressure upon it.

So lets switch it up back to the med ball.
A gun-bullet.
Solid "exhaust".
Is the bullet or med ball being "super compressed"?

The bullet is expanded against by the expanding gas created inside the shell casing which creates an action/reaction between that casing and the back of the bullet until the build up forces that bullet from the casing.
The dense mass of the bullet, casing and propellant is acted upon once it displaces the atmosphere it is in at the time, which reacts accordingly to refill the lower pressure created from the high pressure push.

The medicine ball is simply held and launched against the atmospheric stack which is compressed and that compression is then equalised back to the person who threw the ball, creating a action/reaction push back.

Or  recoil if you want to look at it that way.
It's all gas on gas.

Take away the reactionary gas and you have zero work done.
This is where the fantasy space vacuum remains just that for rockets.

Quote from: Themightykabool

Lets take the recent nonsense and bring it back to this post.
The water rocket.
Your claim is the water super compresses which allows it to work.

No, that is not my claim, at all.
Gas or atmosphere super compresses, depending on the force applied or contained and that containment being breached.
The water pressure is an end product of that compressed gas released as a super expanding gas pressure upon it.

Quote from: Themightykabool

So lets switch it up back to the med ball.
A gun-bullet.
Solid "exhaust".
Is the bullet or med ball being "super compressed"?

The bullet is expanded against by the expanding gas created inside the shell casing which creates an action/reaction between that casing and the back of the bullet until the build up forces that bullet from the casing.
The dense mass of the bullet, casing and propellant is acted upon once it displaces the atmosphere it is in at the time, which reacts accordingly to refill the lower pressure created from the high pressure push.

The medicine ball is simply held and launched against the atmospheric stack which is compressed and that compression is then equalised back to the person who threw the ball, creating a action/reaction push back.

Or  recoil if you want to look at it that way.
It's all gas on gas.

Take away the reactionary gas and you have zero work done.
This is where the fantasy space vacuum remains just that for rockets.

So then water is not required for the water rocket to work?
Pick a stance man!

So then water is not required for the water rocket to work?
Pick a stance man!

You need to understand what you're saying.
If it's a water rocket the water is obviously required, or it wouldn't be a water rocket.

You're the one that's confusing yourself. I'm trying to guess whether you're doing it because you simply are too arrogant to understand or you're doing it deliberately.

In your theory.
You claim the sponges are doing x y z.
What function does the water play in your theory?
Because in your theory, the water rocket should go much higher due to a greater number of sponges being able to be crammed in the tube if the water were not included.

And we all know what the water does because we understand convention physics.
And i shouldnt be surpised you claim "it requires water because its called a water rocket".
What a stupid response that doesnt answer the question.

In your theory.
You claim the sponges are doing x y z.
What function does the water play in your theory?
Because in your theory, the water rocket should go much higher due to a greater number of sponges being able to be crammed in the tube if the water were not included.

The function of the water is it's natural density and ability to resist basic gas compression due to its dense make up.

And we all know what the water does because we understand convention physics.
And i shouldnt be surpised you claim "it requires water because its called a water rocket".
What a stupid response that doesnt answer the question.

No, it wasn't a stupid response. It was a fair response to your query which was stupid.

Quote from: JackBlack

Or another way:
Pressure pushes outwards equally in all directions.

Only when contained.

Why only when contained? Are you saying the when the container is breached, the gas is being sucked out and not pushed out?

Quote from: Themightykabool on November 11, 2019, 08:31:43 AM

In your theory.
You claim the sponges are doing x y z.
What function does the water play in your theory?
Because in your theory, the water rocket should go much higher due to a greater number of sponges being able to be crammed in the tube if the water were not included.

The function of the water is it's natural density and ability to resist basic gas compression due to its dense make up.

No it definitely was a stupid response.
To paraphrase - What does the water do? - "its part of the name, duh"

Ok
Your new response is - Water resists compression.

And ill follow that up -
So does the plastic tube container.
What now?

Quote from: rabinoz on November 11, 2019, 12:34:39 AM

Quote from: sceptimatic on November 10, 2019, 10:00:45 PM

Quote from: rabinoz on November 10, 2019, 04:44:55 PM

If the rocket nozzle is correctly designed there is no "extreme low pressure we call space" inside it!
There might be almost 3000 kg/sec of gas exiting that nozzle at 2570 m/s (for the SpaceX Merlin 1D engine).
So there is no chance of a vacuum in there.

Go and learn something about the design of the correct profile of that rocket nozzle. Learning a bit about hypersonic gas flow wouldn't hurt either.

A rocket nozzle would be as pointless as a chocolate fireguard in your space or extreme low pressure.

In other words you have no knowledge of the design of the expanding bell of a rocket engine nozzle nor of hypersonic gas flow, I realised that long ago.

But whether you like it or not the propagation velocity of disturbances is the speed of sound.
"Rockets can't fly in a vacuum" aficionado, Cikljamas, "proved" that earlier.

The velocity of the exhaust gas in a properly designed rocket nozzle is everywhere greater than Mach 1.
Hence the gas inside the nozzle cannot "know" about the vacuum outside. So there is not "vacuum" inside the nozzle
Learn about de Laval nozzles used in steam turbines - almost the same theory!

Don't give me this "cannot know what's outside" nonsense.

I did give you this "cannot know what's outside" nonsense fact.
Here go back to school and learn a little about supersonic aerodynamics:
Introduction to Compressible Flow, ME 322 Lecture Slides, Winter 2007 and Engineering: De laval nozzle, Mechanical engineering, Spacecraft propulsion, Turbines

You can't learn about compressible flow (gas flow near and above the speed of sound) by dreaming about it!

The rocket does none of the pushing. The gases do all the work.

So the gases just push the rocket, pushing the rocket away while the gas just sits there?
Got it.

It also means you have to have two gases interacting with each other.

So, because there aren't 2 gases interacting with each other in the vacuum, the gas stays put?

You diagram shows nothing of use.
You have massively unbalanced forces and do not show the leverage/resistance at all.

Your diagram directly contradicts your claims of how your model works.
But that isn't surprising, as following your model would lead to one of 2 results:
The rocket works in a vacuum or the gas remains inside the tube even though it is exposed to the vacuum.
And we all know you can't accept either of them.

The gas ejects itself once you breach the container.

Again, HOW?
What is it pushing against to eject itself?
Either it is the rocket, and thus it is pushing the rocket, or it is something the rocket can also push against.

Because the fantasy vacuum offers zero resistance

The gas still has mass which still provides resistance.
Again, if there was no resistance, then according nothing can move. That means the gas needs to remain inside the rocket.

The rocket is moved as it sits atop the gas fight.

No, the rocket is moved as it is pushed away by the gas.
The atmosphere can be ignored. All it does is complicate matters.

Only when contained.

No. Even when not contained, pressure is still exerted in all directions.
Again, if this was not the case, bombs wouldn't work. That is because as soon as it cracks, the gas is not contained and thus according to you would only push in the direction of the crack.
It would also mean that rockets don't even work in the atmosphere.

But if you want an even simpler experiment, look at a balloon.
Fill it up.
What is holding the balloon stretched out? The pressure of the air pushing the skin of the balloon away.
According to you, as soon as you release the balloon such that the air can leak out the opening, then the pressure no longer pushes in every direction, instead it just pushes out the opening. That means the balloon would instantly shrink.
But it doesn't.
Instead it is held open by the pressure still pushing against the skin of the balloon.

So no, pressure is still exerted in all directions.

Absolutely a need or you have nothing that works, let alone a rocket...but never a fantasy space rocket.

Nope, my explanation works without any atmosphere or expansion nonsense.
You were unable to show a single problem with it. Instead you just do you typical rejection of reality appealing to nonsense which is easily disproven.

The function of the water is it's natural density and ability to resist basic gas compression due to its dense make up.

And how does that help?
You said you wanted the atmosphere to do that, not the stuff inside the rocket.
Remember, if what is inside the rocket can do it, then there is no problem with rockets in a vacuum.


Now again, in my rocket example, what is the gas pushing against which isn't the rocket and which the rocket can't push against?
You have been avoiding this very simple question for so long. Why not just admit you were wrong?

Quote from: sceptimatic on November 11, 2019, 05:07:50 AM

Quote from: JackBlack

Or another way:
Pressure pushes outwards equally in all directions.

Only when contained.

Why only when contained? Are you saying the when the container is breached, the gas is being sucked out and not pushed out?

No I'm not saying anything of the sort.
There's no suck in anything. It's all push. It has to be all push.
Suck is just a word we use to describe what happens with pressure change, such as so called vacuum...but it's all push and that's due to compression and expansion of gases that are all attached with zero free space and which moves by expansion by being crushed forward from any expansion point, by more compressed gas molecules.

However, if you contain them then you have almost equalisation of molecules, until the breach of the container and only then does the compressed molecules at the front of that breach expand into the external gas/fluid molecules, in terms of atmosphere or even water, which creates a resistance to that decompression.

The first molecules out simply expand on their own but seeing as they expand into that resistance they are naturally expanded into from behind by those gas molecules that follow....and so on and so on which creates a gas on gas fight.
Anything materialistic that contains them will be pushed away on that gas fight.

Quote from: sceptimatic on November 11, 2019, 11:12:01 AM

Quote from: Themightykabool on November 11, 2019, 08:31:43 AM

In your theory.
You claim the sponges are doing x y z.
What function does the water play in your theory?
Because in your theory, the water rocket should go much higher due to a greater number of sponges being able to be crammed in the tube if the water were not included.

The function of the water is it's natural density and ability to resist basic gas compression due to its dense make up.

No it definitely was a stupid response.
To paraphrase - What does the water do? - "its part of the name, duh"

Ok
Your new response is - Water resists compression.

And ill follow that up -
So does the plastic tube container.
What now?

Start making sense.

Quote from: sceptimatic on November 11, 2019, 01:51:08 AM

Quote from: rabinoz on November 11, 2019, 12:34:39 AM

Quote from: sceptimatic on November 10, 2019, 10:00:45 PM

Quote from: rabinoz on November 10, 2019, 04:44:55 PM

If the rocket nozzle is correctly designed there is no "extreme low pressure we call space" inside it!
There might be almost 3000 kg/sec of gas exiting that nozzle at 2570 m/s (for the SpaceX Merlin 1D engine).
So there is no chance of a vacuum in there.

Go and learn something about the design of the correct profile of that rocket nozzle. Learning a bit about hypersonic gas flow wouldn't hurt either.

A rocket nozzle would be as pointless as a chocolate fireguard in your space or extreme low pressure.

In other words you have no knowledge of the design of the expanding bell of a rocket engine nozzle nor of hypersonic gas flow, I realised that long ago.

But whether you like it or not the propagation velocity of disturbances is the speed of sound.
"Rockets can't fly in a vacuum" aficionado, Cikljamas, "proved" that earlier.

The velocity of the exhaust gas in a properly designed rocket nozzle is everywhere greater than Mach 1.
Hence the gas inside the nozzle cannot "know" about the vacuum outside. So there is not "vacuum" inside the nozzle
Learn about de Laval nozzles used in steam turbines - almost the same theory!

Don't give me this "cannot know what's outside" nonsense.

I did give you this "cannot know what's outside" nonsense fact.
Here go back to school and learn a little about supersonic aerodynamics:
Introduction to Compressible Flow, ME 322 Lecture Slides, Winter 2007 and Engineering: De laval nozzle, Mechanical engineering, Spacecraft propulsion, Turbines

You can't learn about compressible flow (gas flow near and above the speed of sound) by dreaming about it!

Correct I can't learn by using this.
This mentions space craft. I don't believe in space craft for the reasons I gave.
I don't care about what this that and the other is supposed to do. I'm telling you from my side why it does what it does and why we see things working because of it. And also why fantasy space vehicles are complete and utter nonsense, not to mention silly things like 3000 ton rockets lifting off the deck by usage of super large engines which are an idiotic way to move any rocket with the way they're set up.

A rocket is basically a firework in the burn stakes. Engines are an idiocy in the way we're told they work for so called space rockets.

By all means jump about and hand wave and scream and tell me about all the all go no stop, rockets into space and beyond books on the fact shelves of your local uni, library, kindle, internet or your home book case.
It proves nothing other than the ability to read and absorb and regurgitate whatever it is that takes your fancy.

I know I know. But I'm ignorant and this is how life works and all that gunk.
Just accept that I don't believe in a globe that we walk upon.
I don't believe in a spinning globe.
I don't believe in space as we're told it is.
I don't believe in space rockets.


This is what we're dealing with so using the stuff you're trying to throw at me as some kind of absolute truth, is absolutely pointless, unless you can absolutely back it up to a point where I cannot dispute it.
You've failed to do it as have everyone else...and you'll continue to fail even amid using every trick in your little black book.
By all means get back to the pigeon stuff if you think it helps you get your points across. I do like a laugh now and again.

Quote from: Stash on November 11, 2019, 11:30:35 AM

Quote from: sceptimatic on November 11, 2019, 05:07:50 AM

Quote from: JackBlack

Or another way:
Pressure pushes outwards equally in all directions.

Only when contained.

Why only when contained? Are you saying the when the container is breached, the gas is being sucked out and not pushed out?

No I'm not saying anything of the sort.
There's no suck in anything. It's all push. It has to be all push.
Suck is just a word we use to describe what happens with pressure change, such as so called vacuum...but it's all push and that's due to compression and expansion of gases that are all attached with zero free space and which moves by expansion by being crushed forward from any expansion point, by more compressed gas molecules.

However, if you contain them then you have almost equalisation of molecules, until the breach of the container and only then does the compressed molecules at the front of that breach expand into the external gas/fluid molecules, in terms of atmosphere or even water, which creates a resistance to that decompression.

The first molecules out simply expand on their own but seeing as they expand into that resistance they are naturally expanded into from behind by those gas molecules that follow....and so on and so on which creates a gas on gas fight.
Anything materialistic that contains them will be pushed away on that gas fight.

So it is all blow, not suck? That is the basis of it?

The terminology is fascinating.

Quote from: Themightykabool on November 11, 2019, 11:32:17 AM

Quote from: sceptimatic on November 11, 2019, 11:12:01 AM

Quote from: Themightykabool on November 11, 2019, 08:31:43 AM

In your theory.
You claim the sponges are doing x y z.
What function does the water play in your theory?
Because in your theory, the water rocket should go much higher due to a greater number of sponges being able to be crammed in the tube if the water were not included.

The function of the water is it's natural density and ability to resist basic gas compression due to its dense make up.

No it definitely was a stupid response.
To paraphrase - What does the water do? - "its part of the name, duh"

Ok
Your new response is - Water resists compression.

And ill follow that up -
So does the plastic tube container.
What now?

Start making sense.

you first!

your claim is that water is needed because it "resists compression" which answers nothing.
the end of the plastic tube also resists compression.
the ground resists compression.
why is water needed for the water rocket when your claim that liftoff is provided by the expansion of sponges?

Quote from: Stash on November 11, 2019, 11:30:35 AM

Quote from: sceptimatic on November 11, 2019, 05:07:50 AM

Quote from: JackBlack

Or another way:
Pressure pushes outwards equally in all directions.

Only when contained.

Why only when contained? Are you saying the when the container is breached, the gas is being sucked out and not pushed out?

No I'm not saying anything of the sort.
There's no suck in anything. It's all push. It has to be all push.
Suck is just a word we use to describe what happens with pressure change, such as so called vacuum...but it's all push and that's due to compression and expansion of gases that are all attached with zero free space and which moves by expansion by being crushed forward from any expansion point, by more compressed gas molecules.

However, if you contain them then you have almost equalisation of molecules, until the breach of the container and only then does the compressed molecules at the front of that breach expand into the external gas/fluid molecules, in terms of atmosphere or even water, which creates a resistance to that decompression.

The first molecules out simply expand on their own but seeing as they expand into that resistance they are naturally expanded into from behind by those gas molecules that follow....and so on and so on which creates a gas on gas fight.
Anything materialistic that contains them will be pushed away on that gas fight.

There's always a push, right? And in the closed container, the pressurized or combusted gas is pushing in all directions within the closed container, right?

The container is breached in some manner, let's say at one end where a nozzle is, and logic would dictate that the pressurized or combusted gas that was just a second ago pushing on all sides of the inside of the container, keeps pushing, expanding, but now it has somewhere to go, out the breach/nozzle. 

When the pressurized or combusted gas is pushing in all directions within the closed container, why does it stop doing so when the container is breached? What's causing that existing pressure to completely evaporate? Why does it no longer push? Where did it go?

A rocket is basically a firework in the burn stakes. Engines are an idiocy in the way we're told they work for so called space rockets.

And that's exactly why you will never understand why rockets work better in a vacuum than in the atmosphere.

Quote from: sceptimatic on November 11, 2019, 05:07:50 AM

The rocket does none of the pushing. The gases do all the work.

So the gases just push the rocket, pushing the rocket away while the gas just sits there?
Got it.

Nope.

Quote from: sceptimatic on November 11, 2019, 05:07:50 AM

It also means you have to have two gases interacting with each other.

So, because there aren't 2 gases interacting with each other in the vacuum, the gas stays put?

Nope.

You diagram shows nothing of use.
You have massively unbalanced forces and do not show the leverage/resistance at all.

It's clear to see the massively unbalanced forces.

Your diagram directly contradicts your claims of how your model works.

No. It actually does a good job in showing the gas fight.

But that isn't surprising, as following your model would lead to one of 2 results:
The rocket works in a vacuum or the gas remains inside the tube even though it is exposed to the vacuum.
And we all know you can't accept either of them.

Neither happens...except, some gas would be left inside the casing.

Quote from: sceptimatic on November 11, 2019, 05:07:50 AM

The gas ejects itself once you breach the container.

Again, HOW?
What is it pushing against to eject itself?

Itself.

Either it is the rocket, and thus it is pushing the rocket, or it is something the rocket can also push against.

The rocket sits on the gas and the gas pushes the rocket up by the gas build under it.

Nothing happens on the inside of the rocket, except flow and expansion of gas which starts from the very breach of the rocket.

Quote from: sceptimatic on November 11, 2019, 05:07:50 AM

Because the fantasy vacuum offers zero resistance

The gas still has mass which still provides resistance.

Only to itself against following gas molecules that are expanding because of the breach.

Again, if there was no resistance, then according nothing can move. That means the gas needs to remain inside the rocket.

Only the very last of it that cannot expand any further out of it into extreme low pressure or your fictional space vacuum.

Quote from: sceptimatic on November 11, 2019, 05:07:50 AM

The rocket is moved as it sits atop the gas fight.

No, the rocket is moved as it is pushed away by the gas.

Yes, you could look at it this way. It is moved to your vision. You can see it move to your vision.
However, it's how and why it moves which is the crux of the matter, of which I've explained.

The atmosphere can be ignored. All it does is complicate matters.

No, no, no, it does not complicate matters. It's an absolute major part of the argument. To leave it out would be to hand your the fictional vacuum argument of a rocket supposedly working in space.

Quote from: sceptimatic on November 11, 2019, 05:07:50 AM

Only when contained.

No. Even when not contained, pressure is still exerted in all directions.

Not equally it's not.

Again, if this was not the case, bombs wouldn't work. That is because as soon as it cracks, the gas is not contained and thus according to you would only push in the direction of the crack.
It would also mean that rockets don't even work in the atmosphere.

Bombs work because of internal expansion inside a vessel being allowed to breach casing/shell without having any suitable opening to allow that expansion, which causes the stress fracturing of that casing and the explosion of that gas against that casing which creates shrapnel and also a mass contraction of atmosphere by that super expansion of gases.

But if you want an even simpler experiment, look at a balloon.
Fill it up.
What is holding the balloon stretched out?
The pressure of the air pushing the skin of the balloon away.
According to you, as soon as you release the balloon such that the air can leak out the opening, then the pressure no longer pushes in every direction, instead it just pushes out the opening. That means the balloon would instantly shrink.
But it doesn't.
Instead it is held open by the pressure still pushing against the skin of the balloon.

So no, pressure is still exerted in all directions.

A balloon filled with air is now a compressed air container, if the end is tied.
It's pushing against the atmosphere by displacing it by the amount that's been taken from the atmosphere and placed into that balloon skin.
That atmosphere is squeezing back against it but won't crush it until you allow it by opening the nozzle.

Once you do that the atmosphere simply squeezes that balloon as the balloon air expands  into the stack below and is also squeezed back against to equalise the pressure, until the balloon is deflated.

The air coming out of the balloon is coming out in one direction, which is towards the open end.

Quote from: sceptimatic on November 11, 2019, 05:07:50 AM

Absolutely a need or you have nothing that works, let alone a rocket...but never a fantasy space rocket.

Nope, my explanation works without any atmosphere or expansion nonsense.

I'm well aware of you adhering to that. This is the reason we're debating it.

You were unable to show a single problem with it.

I've shown massive problems with it but you don;t accept them. I'm hardly surprised at that.

Instead you just do you typical rejection of reality appealing to nonsense which is easily disproven.

Clearly it is not easily dis-proven or you wouldn't be arguing the points. You would simply sit back and
cast it off...but you don't.

Quote from: sceptimatic on November 11, 2019, 11:12:01 AM

The function of the water is it's natural density and ability to resist basic gas compression due to its dense make up.

And how does that help?
You said you wanted the atmosphere to do that, not the stuff inside the rocket.
Remember, if what is inside the rocket can do it, then there is no problem with rockets in a vacuum.

The only way water will be released from the rocket is if there's a compression behind that water. Compressed air provides that compression which will only turn to expansion if the bottle is breached.

Now again, in my rocket example, what is the gas pushing against which isn't the rocket and which the rocket can't push against?
You have been avoiding this very simple question for so long. Why not just admit you were wrong?

The gas expands all on its own due to being allowed to by a breach in the containment of it, against lesser compressed resistance, which is, in turn compressed by this to create it's own equal resistance and this is what the rocket sits atop of.

Quote from: sceptimatic on November 11, 2019, 11:04:47 PM

Quote from: Stash on November 11, 2019, 11:30:35 AM

Quote from: sceptimatic on November 11, 2019, 05:07:50 AM

Quote from: JackBlack

Or another way:
Pressure pushes outwards equally in all directions.

Only when contained.

Why only when contained? Are you saying the when the container is breached, the gas is being sucked out and not pushed out?

No I'm not saying anything of the sort.
There's no suck in anything. It's all push. It has to be all push.
Suck is just a word we use to describe what happens with pressure change, such as so called vacuum...but it's all push and that's due to compression and expansion of gases that are all attached with zero free space and which moves by expansion by being crushed forward from any expansion point, by more compressed gas molecules.

However, if you contain them then you have almost equalisation of molecules, until the breach of the container and only then does the compressed molecules at the front of that breach expand into the external gas/fluid molecules, in terms of atmosphere or even water, which creates a resistance to that decompression.

The first molecules out simply expand on their own but seeing as they expand into that resistance they are naturally expanded into from behind by those gas molecules that follow....and so on and so on which creates a gas on gas fight.
Anything materialistic that contains them will be pushed away on that gas fight.

So it is all blow, not suck? That is the basis of it?

The terminology is fascinating.

It's all push.

your claim is that water is needed because it "resists compression" which answers nothing.
the end of the plastic tube also resists compression.
the ground resists compression.
why is water needed for the water rocket when your claim that liftoff is provided by the expansion of sponges?

Water is needed for a water rocket because the words "water rocket" requires that water be used.

If it was an air rocket, air would be used.
If it was a firework then a fire would have to be used.


And so on.

Unless you want to get to the point.

Quote from: Themightykabool on November 11, 2019, 11:47:26 PM

your claim is that water is needed because it "resists compression" which answers nothing.
the end of the plastic tube also resists compression.
the ground resists compression.
why is water needed for the water rocket when your claim that liftoff is provided by the expansion of sponges?

Water is needed for a water rocket because the words "water rocket" requires that water be used.

If it was an air rocket, air would be used.
If it was a firework then a fire would have to be used.


And so on.

Unless you want to get to the point.

Wow...
Just wow.

What does the water add to the rocket that makes it go?

There's always a push, right? And in the closed container, the pressurized or combusted gas is pushing in all directions within the closed container, right?

Right.

The container is breached in some manner, let's say at one end where a nozzle is, and logic would dictate that the pressurized or combusted gas that was just a second ago pushing on all sides of the inside of the container, keeps pushing, expanding, but now it has somewhere to go, out the breach/nozzle. 

Correct.

When the pressurized or combusted gas is pushing in all directions within the closed container, why does it stop doing so when the container is breached? What's causing that existing pressure to completely evaporate? Why does it no longer push? Where did it go?

It expands away from the containment and straight into awaiting resistance. In this case it would be atmospheric pressure for resistance to that.

Wow...
Just wow.

What does the water add to the rocket that makes it go?

Potential energy and dense mass.