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

Quote from: Stash on November 13, 2019, 11:44:26 PM

Quote from: sceptimatic on November 13, 2019, 11:35:47 PM

The way you're likely looking at it is in thinking that once the exit is opened the gases are still pushing in opposite direction against each end of the tank.
They aren't.
They are using the energy applied to them in terms of being compressed and are now decompressing naturally but are still all attached.

Ok, Y/N didn't work.

If the gauge at the top still registers pressure, pressure is being applied the the gauge. That's what a pressure gauge does, it registers pressure. If it's 0, there is no pressure. If it's more than 0 there is. And if it's more than 0 pressure its pushing against the gauge. I don't know how to make that more clear.

The pressure when set was potential energy reading.
Once the valve is opened the potential energy is now flowing energy in a decompression chain reaction.

In other words all the arrows are pointing towards the exit in their many many different expansion rates from exit hole to gauge.
The gauge starts to show a consistent drop in pressure because there's no pressure applied to that gauge from the gas molecules (arrows).

Incorrect.
When air ceases to prwss on the gauge it shows zero.
If some presses on the gauge it shows a reading.

If yoyr sprig fully compressssd showed a reading of 16units.
And you opened the one end and allowed the spirng to decompress half way, cut the spring, closed the cap, the gauge woukd read 4.(because conventional physics uses the sq law).

To stash s point

A ballloon slowly deflating shows the air inside is still pushing on the edges.
If it werent, the balloon would instantly collapse.
Scepti keeps flip flopping wjen addrsssing tjis point.

Totally different argument.

Quote from: sceptimatic on November 13, 2019, 03:13:00 PM

Air can do it but the air alone is dissipated very quickly against the stack which gives very little gas on gas push to lift the rocket.

Why?
Why is the air dissipated so much more quickly than the water?

And that's the problem.

And here we have another nonsensical explanation.
If the super crush is there, then by yoyr very "model" water is not needed and the water rpcket in theory would go much higher if more sppnges were squished into it.

Water density aided by internal compressed air push into it to thrust it against the stack below the direct breach.

All the arrows are not pointing to the exit otherwise:

- There would be no reading on the top gauge.

There is no set reading. The gauge is showing counter consistent movement.

Remember, a gauge measures pressure. If the pressure is above 0, there is still pressure.

Only if it's contained.

- A balloon would instantaneously collapse and lose it's shape when the valve opened. It does not

Only in extreme low pressure.

Again, you can't have the contradiction:

There are no contradictions.

When the valve is opened, there is no pressure on the gauge yet it shows pressure on the gauge.

It shows a needle counter movement to the negative, not pressure.

Totally different argument.

No, the same argument.
The pressure gauge trying to return to 0 is mediated by similar forces to the balloon trying to shrink.
Both are objects which have been pushed away from their natural, relaxed state by the pressure of the air.
Both have a force trying to push them back as a result of this unnatural state.
Both can remain as they are with the pressure inside pushing outwards towards them with a constant force.
Both will very quickly return to their natural state if there is nothing pushing them out.

Both show you are wrong, and that gas does still push outwards in all directions, rather than being sentient and magically pushing towards the exit.

This is what happens to a balloon when it can relax naturally:

You already have a video of it deflating.
Notice how the deflation is much slower and takes a lot longer for the balloon to relax.
This shows that while there is still pressurised air inside it, it is still pushing against the balloon, keeping it inflated.

And that's the problem.

Yes, that's the problem FOR YOU.

Real physics can explain the purpose of the water quite well.

Water density aided by internal compressed air push into it to thrust it against the stack below the direct breach.

And air would do that as well.

Again, your model only makes sense to say water works better than air, if you admit that the resistance of the atmosphere is a problem, or if you admit that the exhaust can be what is being "pushed" against.
But that would mean that rockets work better in space.
If you want to appeal to the resistance of the atmosphere, then an air based rocket would work better than a water based one.

Quote from: Themightykabool on November 14, 2019, 12:13:26 AM

To stash s point

A ballloon slowly deflating shows the air inside is still pushing on the edges.
If it werent, the balloon would instantly collapse.
Scepti keeps flip flopping wjen addrsssing tjis point.

Totally different argument.

It's literally the same argument. Yet another contradiction.

- Air in a balloon pushing on all sides
- Compressed gas in a container pushing on all sides

- Open the valve on the balloon, according to scepti, it should instantaneously collapse. It doesn't.
- Open the valve on the container, according to scepti, it should still register pressure on the opposite end (where the gauge is) yet not be applying any pressure to the gauge. Magic.

This is so logically inconsistent it's beyond compare. Pick a lane. And don't go down the "we don't get it thing..." That's tired and haggard. And inappropriate. We get it. It's literally that your explanations are inconsistent with reality and with themselves. They are contradictions.

The water rocket works because it doesnt rely on pushing against air.
Its a well proven, well calculateable, well repeatable, well predictable experiment.
Your insistence that the rocket needs to push against air has been disproven by your own theory and your inability to explain beyond "its called a water rocket therefore it requires water" has failed on every level.
Unless you can show why rockets sit on stacked air sponges causes them to go up AND how water plays a part, your analogies are useless.
We dpnt need analogies, we need a straight up descriptiom.

Heres one -

Water rockets fly up because the air sponges exhausted expand to their decompressed and natural size, lifting the rocket into the air to the expectdd height of the amount of squish provided to the air sponges inside the tube.
The water acts as a go-between foudation between the exhausted air sponges and the regular air sponges.
The water sits on the outside stack air sponges while the compressed spong air uses the water as a springbaord and is given time to expand and shoot the rocket up.

BUT
by that theory, it doesnt make sense because the rocket is set on the ground which is already a foundation and replacing water with more sponges would make the rocket less dense (denP)/ lighter and so it should go higher with more compressed sponges inside and less displaced sponges above.
But it doesnt.
Because its wrong.

Perhaps you could draw a simple diagram that shows the tube, the compressed air, the water, the outside normal air.

Then draw arrows showing what the water does.

And then compare that with a diagram without the air.

How about you draw one showing what you think and I'll alter it to show what I'm saying.

Here is another simple diagram for you to get completely wrong:

This is a membrane being pushed to the right by a spring.
If there is nothing pushing it to the left, what would happen?
Will it very quickly go to the right until the spring has relaxed?
Or will it go very slowly?
Or will it magically depend upon something else?

It depends what you are talking about in terms of what is actually behind the membrane.
If it's air behind it then it will be compressed by the decompression of the spring. In which case the spring will start of fairly rapid in decompression and then gradually slow as the air is compressed by it.

If there is extreme low pressure of air behind that membrane then the spring will rapidly expand into it  because there's extremely tiny resistance.

Quote from: JackBlack on November 14, 2019, 12:20:57 AM

Here is another simple diagram for you to get completely wrong:

This is a membrane being pushed to the right by a spring.
If there is nothing pushing it to the left, what would happen?
Will it very quickly go to the right until the spring has relaxed?
Or will it go very slowly?
Or will it magically depend upon something else?

It depends what you are talking about in terms of what is actually behind the membrane.
If it's air behind it then it will be compressed by the decompression of the spring. In which case the spring will start of fairly rapid in decompression and then gradually slow as the air is compressed by it.

If there is extreme low pressure of air behind that membrane then the spring will rapidly expand into it  because there's extremely tiny resistance.

How is a spring like a gas? A spring is expandable end to end. A gas is expandable in all directions. The two seem yards apart as far as analogies go.

Quote from: Themightykabool on November 14, 2019, 12:18:28 AM

Perhaps you could draw a simple diagram that shows the tube, the compressed air, the water, the outside normal air.

Then draw arrows showing what the water does.

And then compare that with a diagram without the air.

How about you draw one showing what you think and I'll alter it to show what I'm saying.

Pffff
Ive helped you out quite a bit.
You drawing it out yourself will allow you to work it out.
Ever hear of help a kid out 80%?
If you cant do your own simple and basic line drawing then you cant describe it simply and basically.
If you wwre to show a chinese, a hindi, a persian, a frenchie your drawing and they could in their own minds and own language says "oooOOOOoooh", then that means you have communicated it well and it is the best answer.
But you cant.
Keep failing.

When air ceases to press on the gauge it shows zero.

Only if it showed zero to start with.
If not then the gauge would simply show a consistent counter action of the needle as the molecules decompress away from pushing it.

If some presses on the gauge it shows a reading.

Yep, which would happen if pressure is held against it, as in pushing air into it  or pushing air into it and containing that air.
Not when air is allowed to decompress.

If your spring fully compressed showed a reading of 16 units.
And you opened the one end and allowed the spring to decompress half way, cut the spring, closed the cap, the gauge would read 4.(because conventional physics uses the sq law).

Yep, because you have allowed decompression of the spring and then stopped it and sealed it, meaning that spring now shows the reading right after that decompression of the moving needle that has now stopped counter moving, leaving a set reading much smaller.

I have no issue with this.

This is what happens to a balloon when it can relax naturally:

You already have a video of it deflating.
Notice how the deflation is much slower and takes a lot longer for the balloon to relax.
This shows that while there is still pressurised air inside it, it is still pushing against the balloon, keeping it inflated.

It's not being pushed against the balloon from the inside. It's being crushed from the outside as it decompresses against the atmosphere via the nozzle.

Quote from: Themightykabool on November 14, 2019, 12:27:43 AM

When air ceases to press on the gauge it shows zero.

Only if it showed zero to start with.
If not then the gauge would simply show a consistent counter action of the needle as the molecules decompress away from pushing it.

Quote from: Themightykabool

If some presses on the gauge it shows a reading.

Yep, which would happen if pressure is held against it, as in pushing air into it  or pushing air into it and containing that air.
Not when air is allowed to decompress.

Quote from: Themightykabool

If your spring fully compressed showed a reading of 16 units.
And you opened the one end and allowed the spring to decompress half way, cut the spring, closed the cap, the gauge would read 4.(because conventional physics uses the sq law).

Yep, because you have allowed decompression of the spring and then stopped it and sealed it, meaning that spring now shows the reading right after that decompression of the moving needle that has now stopped counter moving, leaving a set reading much smaller.

I have no issue with this.

A pressure reading on a gauge shows the pressure on the gauge. It's called a pressure gauge because it registers pressure on the gauge. If there is no pressure, the pressure gauge registers 0. If there is pressure on the gauge, the gauge registers the pressure on the gauge greater than 0.

Are you seriously trying to state that if a pressure gauge shows greater than 0 there is no pressure applied to the gauge?

It's literally the same argument. Yet another contradiction.

- Air in a balloon pushing on all sides
- Compressed gas in a container pushing on all sides

Not the same argument. There are differences and they need to be dealt with individually so as not to skew.
It's bad enough as it is with you lot not being able to grasp what is being said.

- Open the valve on the balloon, according to scepti, it should instantaneously collapse. It doesn't.

You said that, not me.
I merely argued that it would if up against extreme low pressure.

- Open the valve on the container, according to scepti, it should still register pressure on the opposite end (where the gauge is) yet not be applying any pressure to the gauge. Magic.

It's not registering pressure. The needle is on the counter movement consistently due to the vale being opened at the other end.

That's not a reading of pressure it's a needle decline in numbers only, by sight.

This is so logically inconsistent it's beyond compare. Pick a lane. And don't go down the "we don't get it thing..." That's tired and haggard. And inappropriate. We get it. It's literally that your explanations are inconsistent with reality and with themselves. They are contradictions.

It's logically consistent. There's no contradictions except for the one's you and others believe there are.

If you were 100% sure I was wrong you would not be entertaining arguing my theory.

Quote from: JackBlack on November 14, 2019, 12:40:05 AM

This is what happens to a balloon when it can relax naturally:

You already have a video of it deflating.
Notice how the deflation is much slower and takes a lot longer for the balloon to relax.
This shows that while there is still pressurised air inside it, it is still pushing against the balloon, keeping it inflated.

It's not being pushed against the balloon from the inside. It's being crushed from the outside as it decompresses against the atmosphere via the nozzle.

Ypu had no issue with my spring and then right back contradict yourself.
The air inside the ballooon, while being exhausted/ decompressing, is still under pressure!

The water rocket works because it doesnt rely on pushing against air.

It absolutely relies on it, both ways. Top and bottom.

Your insistence that the rocket needs to push against air has been disproven by your own theory and your inability to explain beyond "its called a water rocket therefore it requires water" has failed on every level.

Or your inability or refusal to understand it.

Unless you can show why rockets sit on stacked air sponges causes them to go up AND how water plays a part, your analogies are useless.

Of course they are, to you and your like minded friends.
This is absolutely fine by me because the more I explain, the more that others may gain a better understanding, so I'm fine with that.
Feel free to deck out anytime you want to.

We dpnt need analogies, we need a straight up descriptiom.

Heres one -

Water rockets fly up because the air sponges exhausted expand to their decompressed and natural size, lifting the rocket into the air to the expectdd height of the amount of squish provided to the air sponges inside the tube.
The water acts as a go-between foudation between the exhausted air sponges and the regular air sponges.
The water sits on the outside stack air sponges while the compressed spong air uses the water as a springbaord and is given time to expand and shoot the rocket up.

BUT
by that theory, it doesnt make sense because the rocket is set on the ground which is already a foundation and replacing water with more sponges would make the rocket less dense (denP)/ lighter and so it should go higher with more compressed sponges inside and less displaced sponges above.
But it doesnt.
Because its wrong.

Clearly the rocket is not set on the ground at the breach.
It's elevated and for good reason.

Quote from: sceptimatic on November 14, 2019, 01:12:34 AM

Quote from: Themightykabool on November 14, 2019, 12:18:28 AM

Perhaps you could draw a simple diagram that shows the tube, the compressed air, the water, the outside normal air.

Then draw arrows showing what the water does.

And then compare that with a diagram without the air.

How about you draw one showing what you think and I'll alter it to show what I'm saying.

Pffff
Ive helped you out quite a bit.
You drawing it out yourself will allow you to work it out.
Ever hear of help a kid out 80%?
If you cant do your own simple and basic line drawing then you cant describe it simply and basically.
If you wwre to show a chinese, a hindi, a persian, a frenchie your drawing and they could in their own minds and own language says "oooOOOOoooh", then that means you have communicated it well and it is the best answer.
But you cant.
Keep failing.

You haven't helped me one bit. You try to hinder more than anything.
If you want to understand my side then show me what your side actually does by diagram.
Point it all out clearly and I'll counteract it clearly.

Failure to do this is you decking out, not me.

Quote from: Stash

- Open the valve on the container, according to scepti, it should still register pressure on the opposite end (where the gauge is) yet not be applying any pressure to the gauge. Magic.

It's not registering pressure. The needle is on the counter movement consistently due to the vale being opened at the other end.

That's not a reading of pressure it's a needle decline in numbers only, by sight.

What in the world are you talking about?

Quote from: Stash

This is so logically inconsistent it's beyond compare. Pick a lane. And don't go down the "we don't get it thing..." That's tired and haggard. And inappropriate. We get it. It's literally that your explanations are inconsistent with reality and with themselves. They are contradictions.

It's logically consistent. There's no contradictions except for the one's you and others believe there are.

If you were 100% sure I was wrong you would not be entertaining arguing my theory.

No, that is a fallacy. We're good as things are and how the entire world works. If you were 100% right, even 10%, 1%, you would revolutionize the entire world. Not just a piece of it, but the entire shooting match. So far, I see no takers. We're good, you offer nothing better.

A pressure reading on a gauge shows the pressure on the gauge.
 It's called a pressure gauge because it registers pressure on the gauge.

Correct, no issues.

If there is no pressure, the pressure gauge registers 0.

Correct, no issues.

 If there is pressure on the gauge, the gauge registers the pressure on the gauge greater than 0.

Correct, as long as the pressure is applying as in pushed in continually and advancing the gauge reading.......or if the pressure reading higher than zero is contained.

I'm fine with either.

Are you seriously trying to state that if a pressure gauge shows greater than 0 there is no pressure applied to the gauge?

It depends.
As above, there would be pressure.
However, if their is a breach/open valve for decompression then the gauge is not being pushed against to make any higher reading or set reading. It's merely counter moving to follow that decompression.

No, that is a fallacy. We're good as things are and how the entire world works. If you were 100% right, even 10%, 1%, you would revolutionize the entire world. Not just a piece of it, but the entire shooting match. So far, I see no takers. We're good, you offer nothing better.

No problem. Carry on accepting what you follow. I'm fine with it.

It depends what you are talking about in terms of what is actually behind the membrane.

Try it in terms of the force on the membrane.

Only if it showed zero to start with.

Nope. If it isn't applying a force to the gauge, the gauge shows 0.

The only way to prevent it returning to 0 very quickly is if there is a force keeping it on.

It's not being pushed against the balloon from the inside.

Again, if that was the case it would very rapidly shrink, just like the balloon that popped.
The fact that it doesn't shows that the air inside is still pushing outwards to hold the balloon out.

There are differences and they need to be dealt with individually so as not to skew.

The differences are irrelavent to the argument.
Both cases show that the air inside is still pressing outwards, not just towards the exit.
Both cases show you are wrong, for the same reason.

The needle is on the counter movement consistently due to the vale being opened at the other end.

It has no connection to the valve other than the air.
The only way it knows the valve is open is that the pressure is slowly dropping.

If you were 100% sure I was wrong you would not be entertaining arguing my theory.

Again, we care about the truth.
We know 100% that you are wrong.

If you weren't wrong, you would be able to answer our questions without repeatedly contradicting yourself.

Quote from: Stash on November 14, 2019, 01:33:51 AM

A pressure reading on a gauge shows the pressure on the gauge.
 It's called a pressure gauge because it registers pressure on the gauge.

Correct, no issues.

Quote from: Stash

If there is no pressure, the pressure gauge registers 0.

Correct, no issues.

So you accept that pressure gauges need pressure to have a reading.

Quote from: Stash on November 14, 2019, 01:33:51 AM

A pressure reading on a gauge shows the pressure on the gauge.
 It's called a pressure gauge because it registers pressure on the gauge.

Correct, no issues.

Quote from: Stash

If there is no pressure, the pressure gauge registers 0.

Correct, no issues.

Quote from: Stash

 If there is pressure on the gauge, the gauge registers the pressure on the gauge greater than 0.

Correct, as long as the pressure is applying as in pushed in continually and advancing the gauge reading.......or if the pressure reading higher than zero is contained.

I'm fine with either.

Quote from: Stash

Are you seriously trying to state that if a pressure gauge shows greater than 0 there is no pressure applied to the gauge?

It depends.
As above, there would be pressure.
However, if their is a breach/open valve for decompression then the gauge is not being pushed against to make any higher reading or set reading. It's merely counter moving to follow that decompression.

What kind of voodoo is, "a breach/open valve for decompression then the gauge is not being pushed against to make any higher reading or set reading. It's merely counter moving to follow that decompression."?

What in the world does "counter moving to follow that decompression," mean?

It's a gauge. It shows the pressure against it as it is building, it show's the pressure against it at it lessens. That's what a gauge does. If it shows a reading, it is showing pressure, up or down. Hence the name, 'pressure gauge'. 'Counter moving to follow that decompression', means literally nothing and not what a gauge does, whatever that means. "Counter moving"? You're literally making things up.

A pressure reading on a pressure gauge shows the pressure on the gauge. There's no 'counter moving' bullshit.

Quote from: Stash on November 14, 2019, 01:46:54 AM

No, that is a fallacy. We're good as things are and how the entire world works. If you were 100% right, even 10%, 1%, you would revolutionize the entire world. Not just a piece of it, but the entire shooting match. So far, I see no takers. We're good, you offer nothing better.

No problem. Carry on accepting what you follow. I'm fine with it.

Apparently the entire globe is fine with it. Otherwise, a smart person would take you up on your notions and be like, "We could revolutionize everything!" But you don't have a consistent model and no way to engineer any of it into something workable so we're kind of left with meh. And everyone is still designing, engineering everything against your notions. Not just rockets, but pneumatics, hydraulics, anything that lifts or moves something. The whole world is still building all those tools the old fashioned way based upon, according to you, incorrect mechanics. Yet they work, and work very well. Somehow, haphazardly, the world's designers and engineers have figured out how to create devices that work in exactly the opposite way that they designed them to work. And they still work and how they do it is an absolute mystery to them. Makes total sense...

Hes just stringing along words.
There is no meaning.

So you accept that pressure gauges need pressure to have a positive reading.

Absolutely.

What kind of voodoo is, "a breach/open valve for decompression then the gauge is not being pushed against to make any higher reading or set reading. It's merely counter moving to follow that decompression."?

It means opening a valve to allow expansion of gas that follows a one way route out of that valve.
The gauge pointer merely drops due to following that one way street and has no return pressure as long as it's flowing down that one way street.

What in the world does "counter moving to follow that decompression," mean?

Counter means opposite.
In terms of the gauge having positive pressure upon it, the decompression is counter to it.

It's a gauge. It shows the pressure against it as it is building

That's fine in that term.

it show's the pressure against it at it lessens.

Nope, it does not, unless it's open and shut valve to intermittently allow expansion then back to repressurising to show a lesser reading.

That's what a gauge does. If it shows a reading, it is showing pressure, up or down.

Yep, but it won't have any pressure against it with an open valve. Unless pressure is forced back in or the valve is closed.

Hence the name, 'pressure gauge'.

Yep and it's fine for reading pressure as long as the pressure is forced in or the valve is shut and the pressure is contained.

'Counter moving to follow that decompression', means literally nothing and not what a gauge does, whatever that means. "Counter moving"? You're literally making things up.

Maybe to you but I know what it means.

A pressure reading on a pressure gauge shows the pressure on the gauge. There's no 'counter moving' bullshit.

Yep, if expansion allowed by opening a valve to allow it.

Quote from: sceptimatic on November 14, 2019, 01:55:23 AM

Quote from: Stash on November 14, 2019, 01:46:54 AM

No, that is a fallacy. We're good as things are and how the entire world works. If you were 100% right, even 10%, 1%, you would revolutionize the entire world. Not just a piece of it, but the entire shooting match. So far, I see no takers. We're good, you offer nothing better.

No problem. Carry on accepting what you follow. I'm fine with it.

Apparently the entire globe is fine with it. Otherwise, a smart person would take you up on your notions and be like, "We could revolutionize everything!" But you don't have a consistent model and no way to engineer any of it into something workable so we're kind of left with meh. And everyone is still designing, engineering everything against your notions. Not just rockets, but pneumatics, hydraulics, anything that lifts or moves something. The whole world is still building all those tools the old fashioned way based upon, according to you, incorrect mechanics. Yet they work, and work very well. Somehow, haphazardly, the world's designers and engineers have figured out how to create devices that work in exactly the opposite way that they designed them to work. And they still work and how they do it is an absolute mystery to them. Makes total sense...

Why wouldn't they?
They work with fictional gravity so it's hardly an issue working with an idea about pressure being something other than what it is told to them.

Quote from: Stash on November 14, 2019, 02:03:30 AM

What kind of voodoo is, "a breach/open valve for decompression then the gauge is not being pushed against to make any higher reading or set reading. It's merely counter moving to follow that decompression."?

It means opening a valve to allow expansion of gas that follows a one way route out of that valve.
The gauge pointer merely drops due to following that one way street and has no return pressure as long as it's flowing down that one way street.

Quote from: Stash

What in the world does "counter moving to follow that decompression," mean?

Counter means opposite.
In terms of the gauge having positive pressure upon it, the decompression is counter to it.

Quote from: Stash

It's a gauge. It shows the pressure against it as it is building

That's fine in that term.

Quote from: Stash

it show's the pressure against it at it lessens.

Nope, it does not, unless it's open and shut valve to intermittently allow expansion then back to repressurising to show a lesser reading.

Quote from: Stash

That's what a gauge does. If it shows a reading, it is showing pressure, up or down.

Yep, but it won't have any pressure against it with an open valve. Unless pressure is forced back in or the valve is closed.

Quote from: Stash

Hence the name, 'pressure gauge'.

Yep and it's fine for reading pressure as long as the pressure is forced in or the valve is shut and the pressure is contained.

Quote from: Stash

'Counter moving to follow that decompression', means literally nothing and not what a gauge does, whatever that means. "Counter moving"? You're literally making things up.

Maybe to you but I know what it means.

Quote from: Stash

A pressure reading on a pressure gauge shows the pressure on the gauge. There's no 'counter moving' bullshit.

Yep, if expansion allowed by opening a valve to allow it.

So youre saying there is no pressure force because one side is open?