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

Good
So the rocket sitting on the interior gas which is on the decompressing gas which is on the water.

Got it?

Hi, this is my first post.  I have been reading this and thought I would relate my experience of what I have seen and done. 
I won't go into how things, just that they do work.  I worked on the Joint Test Assembly(JTA) for the warhead of the MinutemanIII missile. 
The JTA is a warhead without any explosives.  We instrumented the JTA.  The JTA was equipped with telemetry that gave the height,
the velocity, and the distance it went until it splashed down near Kwajalien island.  We were in Vandenburg Air Force Base when they
launched the missile and we monitored the telemetry in real time.  The Minuteman has a range of about 6100 miles, velocity of 15,000 mph,
and a height of 700 miles.  I know these values to be correct because we are the ones that instrumented it and we monitored it in real time.

Now a little bit about vacuums.

I have also worked with vacuums in doing several things that would not work if there was not a very good vacuum.

1: Making metal hydrides
    I had to make metal hydrides from rare earths such as Yttrium.   We would get some Yttrium which is a metal and we would
   melt in an arc melter in a vacuum chamber.  If we did not have a good vacuum the metal would oxidize and we would not be
   able to introduce hydrogen to it.  I would calculate the amount hydrogen that would be introduced to the Yttrium to make a
   hydride of a certain concentration of YH<sub>2 or some other concentration of Hydrogen.  I would then place the Yttrium metal
   in a sealed container and put the proper amount of Hydrogen in a container of a known volume.  I would then evacuate all the
   air in the system using a fore pump and a diffusion pump to get a vacuum as close to zero as we could.  I then heated the
   container of the Yttriuim to a temperature of about 500 deg C.  When the temperature reached the correct value I would then open the
   container of Hydrogen which was not heated and let it react with the Yttrium to make the Hydride.  If we have any air other than a very small
   amount the Yttrium would not react with Hydrogen.

2: Superconducting magnet.
   I have also used superconducting magnets to make Nuclear Magnetic Resonance measurements on the Hydride that was made from #1
   above.  I used liquid Helium to cool the magnet and the Hydride sample.  Liquid He has a temperature of about 4.2 deg K. That is 4.2 deg
   above absolute zero.  We used a dewar(a fancy thermos bottle) that had an outer jacket, then a vacuum between it and the next jacket,
   then liquid nitrogen between it and the next jacket, then a vacuum between it and the final jacket.  After that would the magnet and it would
   be filled with liquid He.  If any one of those vacuums was not a good vacuum it would impossible to keep the liquid He boiling off rapidly and
   the magnet would not work.

I may not have explained it very well.  This happened in the seventies so I am writing this memory.  If anybody needs clarification I will try to
explain things better.
The bottom line is I am relating things that I did and saw which some say is all you can believe.  I could not have done any of those things if
there was no such thing as a vacuum.  I apologize if this is too long. Thanks for the opportunity to tell folks of my very real experiances.</sub> 

Sorry about the small font.  I put a subscript in and I thought I took it out. When I looked at the preview it didn't show the small font.

The gas pushes on the gas/fluid. The rocket sits atop of it and simply rides on it.

If the rocket simply sat on top then there is no force on the rocket and it wouldn't go up.

If the gas is pushing on gas that means there is gas which can be used as leverage and thus rockets work in a vacuum.

Again, you will not have addressed the issue until you either admit rockets do work in a vacuum, claim the gas will magically remain trapped or tell us what the gas is pushing against and address why that doesn't mean the rocket will work as well as there is something to push against.

because the board is pushed up with you along for the ride.

Again, you have 2 options here, either way is defeat for you.
Either the board pushes you up and that is why you go up, or objects can magically without being pushed, directly contradicting your explanation for why rockets can't work in a vacuum.

Quote from: Stash on December 04, 2019, 11:54:55 PM

Quote from: sceptimatic on December 04, 2019, 10:16:06 PM

Quote from: Macarios on December 04, 2019, 02:33:07 AM

Quote from: sceptimatic on December 04, 2019, 01:24:46 AM

Quote from: Macarios on December 03, 2019, 05:20:01 AM

Oh, I do get it.
Better than you would like.
And I'm pointing out the difference between your wishes and the reality.

In your wishes the exiting molecules get out without force.
In reality thet get pushed out by force (there is no push without force).

In your wishes they accelerate outwards without resisting the force that pushes them.
In reality EVERY force gets reaction, including the force that pushes those molecules out.

Clearly you don't get it. And pretending you do only sets you back further.

Sets me back from where?

We already established that the portion that exits wouldn't go anywhere without force.
We also established that every force has opposite reaction force of the same intensity.

Now you are trying to tell us that pushing portion of gas out won't produce the back push of the rocket off that portion?

Of course it has back push but on the gas. On the gas. On the gas....not the rocket interior.

Can you grasp this?

How does the last bit of gas get out if there is no more gas for it to push off of being that it's the last bit there is?

It doesn't.

If the last bit just sits there and doesn't exit because you say it can't, when I close up the container, the pressure valve should still register a pressure reading from that last bit. But it doesn't, it reads 0. What gives?

That last bit of gas knows not to make a sound.

https://www.nasa.gov/specials/artemis/

A few more years to see how they fake it!

Guys
Pressure is relative.
Although there is a zero.
In general, its relative.
Negative inside tube vs outside.
PsiG vs psiA?
In sceptis weirdo method, his pressure is negative to what it was once before.

Quote from: sceptimatic on December 05, 2019, 07:06:13 AM

The gas pushes on the gas/fluid. The rocket sits atop of it and simply rides on it.

If the rocket simply sat on top then there is no force on the rocket and it wouldn't go up.

If the gas is pushing on gas that means there is gas which can be used as leverage and thus rockets work in a vacuum.

Nah. I explained it all perfectly well. I'm quite happy for you to deny it.
I simply look to the logical people to understand what's being said and why rockets do not and cannot work in extreme low pressure.
No external pressure and zero work to happen because there's no resistance to exiting expanding gas to compress that external gas/atmosphere.
Your space is pointless for what you are told happens.

Quote from: sceptimatic on December 05, 2019, 06:56:36 AM

Quote from: Stash on December 04, 2019, 11:54:55 PM

Quote from: sceptimatic on December 04, 2019, 10:16:06 PM

Quote from: Macarios on December 04, 2019, 02:33:07 AM

Quote from: sceptimatic on December 04, 2019, 01:24:46 AM

Quote from: Macarios on December 03, 2019, 05:20:01 AM

Oh, I do get it.
Better than you would like.
And I'm pointing out the difference between your wishes and the reality.

In your wishes the exiting molecules get out without force.
In reality thet get pushed out by force (there is no push without force).

In your wishes they accelerate outwards without resisting the force that pushes them.
In reality EVERY force gets reaction, including the force that pushes those molecules out.

Clearly you don't get it. And pretending you do only sets you back further.

Sets me back from where?

We already established that the portion that exits wouldn't go anywhere without force.
We also established that every force has opposite reaction force of the same intensity.

Now you are trying to tell us that pushing portion of gas out won't produce the back push of the rocket off that portion?

Of course it has back push but on the gas. On the gas. On the gas....not the rocket interior.

Can you grasp this?

How does the last bit of gas get out if there is no more gas for it to push off of being that it's the last bit there is?

It doesn't.

If the last bit just sits there and doesn't exit because you say it can't, when I close up the container, the pressure valve should still register a pressure reading from that last bit. But it doesn't, it reads 0. What gives?

The pressure valve is spring loaded. It will only read pressure over the pressure it was designed in.
Lose the compression from a container back to normal conditions and your gauge reads zero. That zero can be called equalisation, meaning the air inside it is the same as the air outside of it, meaning it is under that pressure, meaning it cannot leave the container unless physically allowed to expand against external pressure by pushing that external pressure away and allowing that expansion to make the container into a lower pressure which would or could read a negative on a gauge of it was set up to do that.

Quote from: JackBlack on December 05, 2019, 12:10:03 PM

Quote from: sceptimatic on December 05, 2019, 07:06:13 AM

The gas pushes on the gas/fluid. The rocket sits atop of it and simply rides on it.

If the rocket simply sat on top then there is no force on the rocket and it wouldn't go up.

If the gas is pushing on gas that means there is gas which can be used as leverage and thus rockets work in a vacuum.

Nah. I explained it all perfectly well.

No, you didn't. You repeatedly failed to explain it and instead repeatedly contradicted yourself, provided one or 2 word answers which in no way address the issue, or just went off on a tangent about expansion or the atmosphere to further try to confuse things, or just ignored it.

I simply look to the logical people to understand what's being said and why rockets do not and cannot work in extreme low pressure.

Cut the crap, you aren't looking for logical people, you are looking for gullible fools.
The logical people that think about it understand quite well that rockets MUST work in a vacuum.

The only argument you have to claim they can't requires that gas remains trapped inside an open container.

The fact you are yet to address this issue and tell us what the gas is pushing against to leave the open container which doesn't allow the rocket to work shows this quite well.

Again, if you want to try to actually explain it you must address what the gas is using as leverage which isn't the rocket itself and which the rocket cannot use as leverage as well, explaining clearly why that is the case.

Again, there are really only 3 options:
1 - Itself. This means objects can push themselves to move so the rocket can push itself to move and not need any external resistance.
2 - The rocket. This means the gas is pushing the rocket and thus the rocket will work.
3 - Something else. This means there is something else out there in space to use as leverage and thus the rocket can use it and move.

Either way, the rocket works. The only other alternatives are to say you don't need anything at all to push against, which again means rockets can't work, or go back to your argument against rockets, where you claim you do need something to push against/use as leverage/resistance and there is no such thing in space so neither the rocket nor the gas can move.

That is the MASSIVE problem with your insane claim. In order for the gas to be able to leave the rocket, the rocket must work in a vacuum. Any argument presented against the ability of the rocket to function in a vacuum works equally well to the gas in the rocket.
So either rockets work in a vacuum or gas can be magically contained inside an open container exposed to a vacuum.

That is why logical people accept that rockets MUST work in a vacuum.

Cut the crap, you aren't looking for logical people, you are looking for gullible fools.

The logical people that think about it understand quite well that rockets MUST work in a vacuum.

When logical thought is applied it becomes pretty obvious as to why rockets cannot work in a so called vacuum.

Quote from: JackBlack on December 12, 2019, 11:55:25 AM

Cut the crap, you aren't looking for logical people, you are looking for gullible fools.

The logical people that think about it understand quite well that rockets MUST work in a vacuum.

When logical thought is applied it becomes pretty obvious as to why rockets cannot work in a so called vacuum.

There is therefore something obviously wrong with what you call "logical thought".
Try some logic applied to real experiments on the properties of gasses rather than your imagined ones might lead to a more realist conclusion.
You might learn a bit from this Gas Laws.
In there you'll find:
The Gas Laws: Pressure Volume Temperature Relationships:
Boyle's Law:  The Pressure-Volume Law
Boyle's law or the pressure-volume law states that the volume of a given amount of gas held at constant temperature varies inversely with the applied pressure when the temperature and mass are constant.
Charles' Law:  The Temperature-Volume Law
This law states that the volume of a given amount of gas held at constant pressure is directly proportional to the Kelvin temperature.
Gay-Lussac's Law:  The Pressure Temperature Law
This law states that the pressure of a given amount of gas held at constant volume is directly proportional to the Kelvin temperature.
Etc.

Pooh pooh as much as like but you cannot dream science up, you must do experiments to find out how things work.

Quote from: Stash on December 05, 2019, 07:06:04 PM

Quote from: sceptimatic on December 05, 2019, 06:56:36 AM

Quote from: Stash on December 04, 2019, 11:54:55 PM

Quote from: sceptimatic on December 04, 2019, 10:16:06 PM

Quote from: Macarios on December 04, 2019, 02:33:07 AM

Quote from: sceptimatic on December 04, 2019, 01:24:46 AM

Quote from: Macarios on December 03, 2019, 05:20:01 AM

Oh, I do get it.
Better than you would like.
And I'm pointing out the difference between your wishes and the reality.

In your wishes the exiting molecules get out without force.
In reality thet get pushed out by force (there is no push without force).

In your wishes they accelerate outwards without resisting the force that pushes them.
In reality EVERY force gets reaction, including the force that pushes those molecules out.

Clearly you don't get it. And pretending you do only sets you back further.

Sets me back from where?

We already established that the portion that exits wouldn't go anywhere without force.
We also established that every force has opposite reaction force of the same intensity.

Now you are trying to tell us that pushing portion of gas out won't produce the back push of the rocket off that portion?

Of course it has back push but on the gas. On the gas. On the gas....not the rocket interior.

Can you grasp this?

How does the last bit of gas get out if there is no more gas for it to push off of being that it's the last bit there is?

It doesn't.

If the last bit just sits there and doesn't exit because you say it can't, when I close up the container, the pressure valve should still register a pressure reading from that last bit. But it doesn't, it reads 0. What gives?

The pressure valve is spring loaded. It will only read pressure over the pressure it was designed in.
Lose the compression from a container back to normal conditions and your gauge reads zero. That zero can be called equalisation, meaning the air inside it is the same as the air outside of it, meaning it is under that pressure, meaning it cannot leave the container unless physically allowed to expand against external pressure by pushing that external pressure away and allowing that expansion to make the container into a lower pressure which would or could read a negative on a gauge of it was set up to do that.

There's a problem here. You claim that as the gas is escaping it's no longer pushing on the pressure gauge. But when you close the valve, the gas presses on the gauge and you get a pressure reading.
In all instances, according to your notion, a container can never be evacuated of ALL the pressurized gas because it needs some to push off of. So the last bits must stay behind, yet they are still pressurized. So when the valve is closed, there should still be some sort of pressure reading left.

When logical thought is applied it becomes pretty obvious as to why rockets cannot work in a so called vacuum.

If that was the case you would have been able to defend your nonsense with logical thought rather than evasion.
I have shown clearly how logical thought leads to the unavoidable conclusion that rockets must work in a vacuum.

Again, if you wish to claim they can't work, and be consistent you would need to claim high pressure gas remains trapped in an open tube exposed to vacuum.
Otherwise you need to explain what the gas is pushing off and why that doesn't mean rockets can work as well.

Until you can actually manage to address that, logic is not on your side.

Quote from: sceptimatic on December 12, 2019, 10:04:16 PM

Quote from: JackBlack on December 12, 2019, 11:55:25 AM

Cut the crap, you aren't looking for logical people, you are looking for gullible fools.

The logical people that think about it understand quite well that rockets MUST work in a vacuum.

When logical thought is applied it becomes pretty obvious as to why rockets cannot work in a so called vacuum.

There is therefore something obviously wrong with what you call "logical thought".
Try some logic applied to real experiments on the properties of gasses rather than your imagined ones might lead to a more realist conclusion.
You might learn a bit from this Gas Laws.
In there you'll find:
The Gas Laws: Pressure Volume Temperature Relationships:
Boyle's Law:  The Pressure-Volume Law
Boyle's law or the pressure-volume law states that the volume of a given amount of gas held at constant temperature varies inversely with the applied pressure when the temperature and mass are constant.
Charles' Law: The Temperature-Volume Law
This law states that the volume of a given amount of gas held at constant pressure is directly proportional to the Kelvin temperature.
Gay-Lussac's Law:  The Pressure Temperature Law
This law states that the pressure of a given amount of gas held at constant volume is directly proportional to the Kelvin temperature.
Etc.

Pooh pooh as much as like but you cannot dream science up, you must do experiments to find out how things work.

I'm not interested in what temperate difference containment meets.
I'm talking about a simple pressure fight of internal against external gases/fluid.

Simple as that.
Your vacuum provides zero or next to zero pressure resistance, so your rocket is not only not going to work in it, it's not going to exist in it because the vacuum cannot exist.

That's as simple as it gets.
Your rockets are good for the atmosphere. After that they're good for scrap.

There's a problem here. You claim that as the gas is escaping it's no longer pushing on the pressure gauge. But when you close the valve, the gas presses on the gauge and you get a pressure reading.

Only if there's gauge pressure inside the container as you close the valve, It will then stop expanding out of the valve and immediately be rendered equalised meaning it tries to expand against all sides.

 

In all instances, according to your notion, a container can never be evacuated of ALL the pressurized gas because it needs some to push off of. So the last bits must stay behind, yet they are still pressurized.

Only against equal external pressure which the gauge itself is basically calibrated to.


 

So when the valve is closed, there should still be some sort of pressure reading left.

The reading would be zero because the gauge will be set at 1 atmosphere and that atmosphere will be internal and external in an open valve and equalised container.

I have shown clearly how logical thought leads to the unavoidable conclusion that rockets must work in a vacuum.

You've shown me nothing that means anything in reality.

Your vacuum provides zero or next to zero pressure resistance, so your rocket is not only not going to work in it

Again, if that was the case that means the gas can't leave it either.

You not liking the word vacuum and wanting to pretend something must be a perfect vacuum to be a vacuum doesn't negate the existence of vacuums.

All your baseless assertions that rockets can't work in a vacuum with absolutely no justification does not mean that they can't.

If you want simplicity it has already been provided for you, in several ways, and you just ignored it because it shows you are wrong.
The rocket pushes off the gas which means the gas goes one way and the rocket goes the other.
The gas exerts pressure outwards, but as it is not entirely contained by the rocket the force on the rocket is unbalanced and results in a force on the rocket.

Either way, rockets work in a vacuum.

Again, if the things need resistance to push off in order to move, then both the rocket and the gas need it. So either both can move or neither can.
So either rockets work in a vacuum or high pressure gas can be magically contained in an open container.

It is as simple as that.
Rockets work in a vacuum and you have nothing to show otherwise and can't address any simple questions that show your argument to be nonsense based upon wilful ignorance/contradictions.


If you wish to assert that rockets can't work and have it be in any way logical in a vacuum you NEED to address the massive issue with that claim that you have failed to do so for so long.
Tell us what the gas is pushing off which allows it to leave the rocket and why that doesn't mean that there is something for the rocket to use as leverage and push off to work in a vacuum.

Yeah, there is this huge gaping hole in the Sceptimatic notion - And JB has brought it up a million times. If the gas 'unfurls', expands, or whatever and pushes off itself when leaving the rocket it would be pushing the rocket as well.

Literally, the Scepti notion shows that rockets work in a vacuum rather than not.

Quote from: JackBlack on December 12, 2019, 11:55:25 AM

Cut the crap, you aren't looking for logical people, you are looking for gullible fools.

The logical people that think about it understand quite well that rockets MUST work in a vacuum.

When logical thought is applied it becomes pretty obvious as to why rockets cannot work in a so called vacuum.

Logic says that if there is no such thing as a vacuum, then space is not a vacuum, therefore rockets should work just fine in space.

Yeah, there is this huge gaping hole in the Sceptimatic notion - And JB has brought it up a million times. If the gas 'unfurls', expands, or whatever and pushes off itself when leaving the rocket it would be pushing the rocket as well.

Literally, the Scepti notion shows that rockets work in a vacuum rather than not.

Everything I'm saying  works from my side. You and other not or refusing to understand it is a problem you need to fix to save you wasting your time.

Quote from: sceptimatic on December 12, 2019, 10:04:16 PM

Quote from: JackBlack on December 12, 2019, 11:55:25 AM

Cut the crap, you aren't looking for logical people, you are looking for gullible fools.

The logical people that think about it understand quite well that rockets MUST work in a vacuum.

When logical thought is applied it becomes pretty obvious as to why rockets cannot work in a so called vacuum.

Logic says that if there is no such thing as a vacuum, then space is not a vacuum, therefore rockets should work just fine in space.

No logic in that whatsoever. A play on words is all that is.

Quote from: Stash on December 13, 2019, 01:06:15 PM

Yeah, there is this huge gaping hole in the Sceptimatic notion - And JB has brought it up a million times. If the gas 'unfurls', expands, or whatever and pushes off itself when leaving the rocket it would be pushing the rocket as well.

Literally, the Scepti notion shows that rockets work in a vacuum rather than not.

Everything I'm saying  works from my side. You and other not or refusing to understand it is a problem you need to fix to save you wasting your time.

Everuthing?

A portion of the gas in chamber, before it became exhaust, had the speed zero.
That portion also has non-zero mass.
To get out, the mass of the exhaust-to-be has to gain some speed.
To reach that speed it needs acceleration.
And for the acceleration it needs force.
The remaining gas inside gives that force as action, and receives reaction force from the exhaust-to-be.
The reaction force pushes the remaining gas in the opposite direction and gives it the proportional acceleration.
The remainin gas can't can't stay in place without support from something else.
That something else are the walls of the chamber that give action force to the remaining gas.
The remaining gas exerts the reaction force on the chamber.
In vacuum of space the chamber (and the whole rocket) has no support to resist that reaction and stay in place.
That's why the rocket can't stay where it was.

Quote from: Stash on December 13, 2019, 01:06:15 PM

Yeah, there is this huge gaping hole in the Sceptimatic notion - And JB has brought it up a million times. If the gas 'unfurls', expands, or whatever and pushes off itself when leaving the rocket it would be pushing the rocket as well.

Literally, the Scepti notion shows that rockets work in a vacuum rather than not.

Everything I'm saying  works from my side. You and other not or refusing to understand it is a problem you need to fix to save you wasting your time.

You say that "Everything I'm you're  saying  works from my your side" but have you verified any of that experimentally?
Until you you verified it experimentally it is simply a hypothesis.

But real rockets have been verified thousands of times and these has been witnessed and photographed by thousands of people.
This one can be seen at over 100 km above the earth, where there is virtually no air, still accelerating.

SpaceX Falcon 9 SES-9 launch, footage from Cocoa Beach with telemetry

And I have to ask just why do all these companies and space agencies keep launching these rockets if not of them work as claimed?
It would simply be totally illogical to waste all that money for the past 60 years and more if none of these things worked.

Simple common sense dictates that rockets work exactly claimed.

Quote from: sceptimatic on December 14, 2019, 02:10:34 AM

Quote from: Stash on December 13, 2019, 01:06:15 PM

Yeah, there is this huge gaping hole in the Sceptimatic notion - And JB has brought it up a million times. If the gas 'unfurls', expands, or whatever and pushes off itself when leaving the rocket it would be pushing the rocket as well.

Literally, the Scepti notion shows that rockets work in a vacuum rather than not.

Everything I'm saying  works from my side. You and other not or refusing to understand it is a problem you need to fix to save you wasting your time.

Everuthing?

A portion of the gas in chamber, before it became exhaust, had the speed zero.
That portion also has non-zero mass.
To get out, the mass of the exhaust-to-be has to gain some speed.
To reach that speed it needs acceleration.
And for the acceleration it needs force.
The remaining gas inside gives that force as action, and receives reaction force from the exhaust-to-be.
The reaction force pushes the remaining gas in the opposite direction and gives it the proportional acceleration.
The remainin gas can't can't stay in place without support from something else.
That something else are the walls of the chamber that give action force to the remaining gas.
The remaining gas exerts the reaction force on the chamber.
In vacuum of space the chamber (and the whole rocket) has no support to resist that reaction and stay in place.
That's why the rocket can't stay where it was.

Let's try something.

If you were to run into a closed door not on a latch would you push that door open before that door could stop you in your tracks?

The answer should be yes.

So what if there was a massive sponge against that door and about 10 feet thick away from it and you ran at that sponge. What do you think would happen.

Believe me I'm  getting to a point but I need you to answer the questions.

Everything I'm saying  works from my side.

If that was the case you would be able to explain what the gas pushes off which allows it to leave the rocket while not allowing the rocket to work.
But you can't, because what you are saying is full of contradictions.

The issue is not us not understanding. We understand quite well. We just realise it is wrong. The issue is your model which cannot explain reality, and your refusal to admit your model is wrong.

Believe me I'm  getting to a point but I need you to answer the questions.

How about first you answer the question you have been avoiding for so long?
What does the gas pushes off which allows it to leave the rocket while not allowing the rocket to work?

Until you can answer that honestly, you are in no position to make demands.

Quote from: sceptimatic on December 14, 2019, 02:10:34 AM

Quote from: Stash on December 13, 2019, 01:06:15 PM

Yeah, there is this huge gaping hole in the Sceptimatic notion - And JB has brought it up a million times. If the gas 'unfurls', expands, or whatever and pushes off itself when leaving the rocket it would be pushing the rocket as well.

Literally, the Scepti notion shows that rockets work in a vacuum rather than not.

Everything I'm saying  works from my side. You and other not or refusing to understand it is a problem you need to fix to save you wasting your time.

You say that "Everything I'm you're  saying  works from my your side" but have you verified any of that experimentally?
Until you you verified it experimentally it is simply a hypothesis.

Most things are a hypothesis and some things are misin/disinformation.
It's all about deciphering what can be potentially legit and what can actually be legit.
Not an easy task for those trying to get past mainstream ideals.

But real rockets have been verified thousands of times and these has been witnessed and photographed by thousands of people.

I'm not doubting rockets being real. I'm doubting space rockets as we are told about and how they supposedly work.
You know this so why even bother to go back to square one?

SpaceX Falcon 9 SES-9 launch, footage from Cocoa Beach with telemetry[/b]

Can you verify it?
I didn't think so.

And I have to ask just why do all these companies and space agencies keep launching these rockets if not of them work as claimed?

What companies?
An Octopus has 8 tentacles. A jelly fish has numerous more.
Think about that.

It would simply be totally illogical to waste all that money for the past 60 years and more if none of these things worked.

It would but then again what is really being wasted?
Initially you have to make the composites and what not. Then the filming and so on. Then use B list actors among the better one's to pacify the audience and you have your set up.
All you need from then on is additions to props.

A tiny fraction of a budget and I wonder where the rest goes. What do you think?
Nah, don't bother answering that.

Simple common sense dictates that rockets work exactly claimed.

Not really. Simple common sense should tell anyone that rockets need an atmosphere in order to work. In fact everything needs to be part of an atmosphere in order to work.


I'll tell you what won't work. Nothing will work in the vacuum you subscribe to and that should really be ultra logical to anyone willing to bother to understand why.


Playing chess with the pigeon again are you?
You should really not bother with me but here you are. Make up your mind.

What does the gas pushes off which allows it to leave the rocket while not allowing the rocket to work?

Gas, like I said.
If you bothered to pay attention you wouldn't need to type so much and have it ignored.

Try to pay attention, you're far from stupid.

Quote from: rabinoz on December 14, 2019, 03:15:40 AM

Until you you verified it experimentally it is simply a hypothesis.

Most things are a hypothesis and some things are misin/disinformation.
It's all about deciphering what can be potentially legit and what can actually be legit.
Not an easy task for those trying to get past mainstream ideals.

Especially when you have no evidence that those "mainstream ideals" are not correct!

Quote from: rabinoz

But real rockets have been verified thousands of times and these has been witnessed and photographed by thousands of people.

I'm not doubting rockets being real. I'm doubting space rockets as we are told about and how they supposedly work.
You know this so why even bother to go back to square one?

Quote from: rabinoz

This one can be seen at over 100 km above the earth, where there is virtually no air, still accelerating.

SpaceX Falcon 9 SES-9 launch, footage from Cocoa Beach with telemetry

Can you verify it?
I didn't think so.

Do YOU have any contrary evidence? I didn't think so.

Quote from: rabinoz

And I have to ask just why do all these companies and space agencies keep launching these rockets if not of them work as claimed?

What companies?
An Octopus has 8 tentacles. A jelly fish has numerous more.
Think about that.

Do YOU have any evidence that those space agencies in the USA, India, China, Europe, Russia and North Korea are connected? I didn't think so.

Quote from: rabinoz

It would simply be totally illogical to waste all that money for the past 60 years and more if none of these things worked.

It would but then again what is really being wasted?
Initially you have to make the composites and what not. Then the filming and so on. Then use B list actors among the better one's to pacify the audience and you have your set up.
All you need from then on is additions to props.

A tiny fraction of a budget and I wonder where the rest goes. What do you think?

The rest of what? NASA's $20 billion is chicken feed compared to the annual value of the space industry!
Some goes into new GNSS services and new generation satellites.
The rockets and satellites is a small part of the value of the "space industry". The $350 billion a year is the revenue from services provided.

I think that you are dreaming up total fiction but you're an expert at that. Anybody can witness the launches and take their own videos from any angle and with as long a telephoto lens as they choose.

Quote from: rabinoz

Simple common sense dictates that rockets work exactly claimed.

Not really. Simple common sense should tell anyone that rockets need an atmosphere in order to work. In fact everything needs to be part of an atmosphere in order to work.

Nope! The simplest of physics dictates that rockets develop thrust quite independent of any atmosphere!
All you need is force = mass x acceleration and voila, you have your basic thrust equation and it works!

I'll tell you what won't work. Nothing will work in the vacuum you subscribe to and that should really be ultra logical to anyone willing to bother to understand why.

You have never proven that "Nothing will work in the vacuum you subscribe to" and it certainly is not "ultra logical to anyone" with some sense and are "willing to bother to understand why".

Playing chess with the pigeon again are you?
You should really not bother with me but here you are. Make up your mind.

I don't really bother with you! You're too far down the rabbit to ever find your way out.
I put my bit in every so often to make sure people see the correct explanation occasionally.