| Users Online Now: 2,212 (Who's On?) | Visitors Today: 1,267,700 | |
| Pageviews Today: 2,116,382 | Threads Today: 856 | Posts Today: 15,098 |
| 08:09 PM | ||
| Users Online Now: 2,212 (Who's On?) | Visitors Today: 1,267,700 | |
| Pageviews Today: 2,116,382 | Threads Today: 856 | Posts Today: 15,098 |
| 08:09 PM | ||
NASA Thrust Equation gets destroyed. | |
oniongrass  User ID: 77403676  United States03/05/2019 09:43 PM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | Chemical rocket thrust does not work in the vacuum of space. Quoting: Idaho Bullwinkle Near the Earth, rocket thrust pushes against the atmosphere around the rocket. In space, rocket thrust pushes against NOTHING. If Chemical rockets can push against nothing, you should be able to fly if you pull hard enough on your shoe laces. No computer or maybe ALL the computers in the world working together can not resolve a 3 body space problem. All bodies in the conventionally accepted space model are claimed to be moving through the universe between 800,000 mph to 2.2 million mph. No body knows the exact speeds so nobody can calculate the movement of a third body to go from on moving mass to another moving mass. I do not KNOW the nature of those lights in the sky. People through mass indoctrination ASSUME that the lights are satellites created and launched by man. This is simply wrong. You can easily test it on earth. Vacuum chambers are easy to create and chemical rockets absolutely DO work in the vacuum. Proof would be nice You are expecting too much. As the less knowledgeable one (trust me, you are) you have a responsibility to read what's in this thread and/or do some outside research, maybe try an experiment to demonstrate some of the ideas (like conservation of momentum) to yourself. Come back with specific questions. "I don't understand why" something very specific. Or "I think this is wrong because" and then a very specific, targeted proof refuting something. . DON'T VAX, PROPHYLAX! ____________ There is no anger in Me: If one offers Me thorns and thistles, I will march to battle against him, And set all of them on fire. But if he holds fast to My refuge, He makes Me his friend; He makes Me his friend. (Isaiah 27:4-5) |
| Anonymous Coward User ID: 77431484  Canada03/05/2019 09:54 PM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | Chemical rocket thrust does not work in the vacuum of space. Quoting: Idaho Bullwinkle Near the Earth, rocket thrust pushes against the atmosphere around the rocket. In space, rocket thrust pushes against NOTHING. If Chemical rockets can push against nothing, you should be able to fly if you pull hard enough on your shoe laces. No computer or maybe ALL the computers in the world working together can not resolve a 3 body space problem. All bodies in the conventionally accepted space model are claimed to be moving through the universe between 800,000 mph to 2.2 million mph. No body knows the exact speeds so nobody can calculate the movement of a third body to go from on moving mass to another moving mass. I do not KNOW the nature of those lights in the sky. People through mass indoctrination ASSUME that the lights are satellites created and launched by man. This is simply wrong. You can easily test it on earth. Vacuum chambers are easy to create and chemical rockets absolutely DO work in the vacuum. Proof would be nice You are expecting too much. As the less knowledgeable one (trust me, you are) you have a responsibility to read what's in this thread and/or do some outside research, maybe try an experiment to demonstrate some of the ideas (like conservation of momentum) to yourself. Come back with specific questions. "I don't understand why" something very specific. Or "I think this is wrong because" and then a very specific, targeted proof refuting something. Experiments were done and research was done. Hence the videos. I read through this thread and I see people make desperate attempts to show that rockets work in space but fail. No one has been able to honestly refute anything in the posted video |
| Digital mix guy User ID: 1508690 United States03/05/2019 10:19 PM  Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | |
| Anonymous Coward User ID: 77425987  South Africa03/05/2019 10:37 PM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | |
| Anonymous Coward User ID: 75409848 United States03/05/2019 10:43 PM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | What you think is irrelevant. If your reasoning based on your interpretation of scientific principles leads you to a DEMONSTRABLY wrong conclusion than your reasoning or your understanding of the relevant scientific principles (or both) must be wrong too. In science observation beats theory every time. Rocket propulsion works in space, why it does is secondary. You not understanding the why, or being very confused about it, doesn't change the facts.  Classic, the shill is talking about actual science. Tell us your egg theory again which explains how the universe came to be |
| New Atlantis User ID: 1825571 United States03/05/2019 10:53 PM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | Yeah, here are two proofs. (1) Look at any modern physics textbook that deals with rocketry. Or just look up "conservation of momentum" and see that it's considered a fundamental principle of physics. (2) Rockets work. Dude that’s not proof To prove this science to some dotards, we'd have to shoot them into space. That's impossible. There's this little problem called the Van Allen Radiation belts, which NASA admits it hasn't solved yet. "What you think, you become." - Buddha |
| Anonymous Coward User ID: 77390281 United States03/05/2019 10:56 PM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | ... Quoting: Anonymous Coward 77042712 This is simply wrong. You can easily test it on earth. Vacuum chambers are easy to create and chemical rockets absolutely DO work in the vacuum. Proof would be nice You are expecting too much. As the less knowledgeable one (trust me, you are) you have a responsibility to read what's in this thread and/or do some outside research, maybe try an experiment to demonstrate some of the ideas (like conservation of momentum) to yourself. Come back with specific questions. "I don't understand why" something very specific. Or "I think this is wrong because" and then a very specific, targeted proof refuting something. Experiments were done and research was done. Hence the videos. I read through this thread and I see people make desperate attempts to show that rockets work in space but fail. No one has been able to honestly refute anything in the posted video Video proof of rockets working in a vacuum have been posted many times in many of these similar threads, yet most deniers remain wilfully ignorant of facts, preferring to argue a point they have little to no understanding of. It ain’t hard to actually search out the proof yourselves if you really want to learn the truth rather than hanging on to your illogical and mostly nonsensical conspiracy theories. *hint* search for videos of “rockets in a vacuum”.. |
| The Rickest Rick Sanchez User ID: 75531924 United States03/05/2019 11:04 PM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | If anything ever reached theoretic Earth escape velocity of 24606 miles per hour it would melt from friction before it reached space. Atmosphere supposedly exists 500 miles above the Earth surface, now they say past the Moon . Quoting: Anonymous Coward 72998710 nasa is full of it, period You don't have to hit speed in atmosphere, genius. "Orbit" is thousands of miles radius. Acceleration to escape velocity is gradual. The universe is basically an animal. It grazes on the ordinary. It creates infinite idiots just to eat them. The Rickest Rick Sanchez comments are meant for entertainment purposes only and should not be construed to reflect the feelings and opinions, implied or expressed, of the author. |
| LHP598 User ID: 77166529 United States03/05/2019 11:04 PM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | ... Quoting: oniongrass Yeah, here are two proofs. (1) Look at any modern physics textbook that deals with rocketry. Or just look up "conservation of momentum" and see that it's considered a fundamental principle of physics. (2) Rockets work. Dude that’s not proof To prove this science to some dotards, we'd have to shoot them into space. That's impossible. There's this little problem called the Van Allen Radiation belts, which NASA admits it hasn't solved yet. You mean which they admitted a few years back they hadn't solved for the electronics they were talking about testing. Or you would if you actually paid attention. If you have to insist that you've won an Internet argument, you've probably lost badly. - Danth's Law |
| The Rickest Rick Sanchez User ID: 75531924 United States03/05/2019 11:07 PM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | ... Quoting: Anonymous Coward 77042712 This is simply wrong. You can easily test it on earth. Vacuum chambers are easy to create and chemical rockets absolutely DO work in the vacuum. Proof would be nice You are expecting too much. As the less knowledgeable one (trust me, you are) you have a responsibility to read what's in this thread and/or do some outside research, maybe try an experiment to demonstrate some of the ideas (like conservation of momentum) to yourself. Come back with specific questions. "I don't understand why" something very specific. Or "I think this is wrong because" and then a very specific, targeted proof refuting something. Experiments were done and research was done. Hence the videos. I read through this thread and I see people make desperate attempts to show that rockets work in space but fail. No one has been able to honestly refute anything in the posted video You dont know what proof and refutation are. The proof is everywhere. There is no refutation by just making an incorrect claim based on your own misunderstanding. Math isn't wrong, your application, assumptions, and conclusions are. The universe is basically an animal. It grazes on the ordinary. It creates infinite idiots just to eat them. The Rickest Rick Sanchez comments are meant for entertainment purposes only and should not be construed to reflect the feelings and opinions, implied or expressed, of the author. |
| Anonymous Coward User ID: 74625207 United States03/05/2019 11:17 PM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | It was said he may have been the first person to ever go through the whole thing, remarkable. Science was lacking in never bringing it to task. When the reporters asked his professor about it he said, 'It doesn't matter that Newton's math is wrong the theory is still right. ha Come to find out Newton was bad at math also. |
| Anonymous Coward User ID: 77425987 South Africa03/05/2019 11:41 PM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | Last year a young math genius went through Newton's math. He found it to be in error on most every page, it did not result it did not compute. A failed theory with no proof a belief system at most. Quoting: Anonymous Coward 74625207 It was said he may have been the first person to ever go through the whole thing, remarkable. Science was lacking in never bringing it to task. When the reporters asked his professor about it he said, 'It doesn't matter that Newton's math is wrong the theory is still right. ha Come to find out Newton was bad at math also. What year did he graduate from Youtube? |
| Anonymous Coward User ID: 77431289  Australia03/06/2019 12:19 AM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | ... Quoting: oniongrass Not sure who's trying to prove what here, but conservation of momentum applies to solids, liquids, gases, plasmas ... every state of matter. Total momentum is conserved unless an external net force is applied. That's why rockets work. Fluids move due to pressure gradient force. The pressure broke apart the soda can and physically pushed it. If there is nothing to push she. The gas moves to low pressure, there is no opposite force Oh gawd. Can't believe this one dimensional thinking. Dude, here's a foolproof test you can do to prove you're wrong. You can do it with a hose and water under pressure. Turn the hose on and feel the thrust back caused by the water being expelled under pressure. Got that? Now, place your hand a couple of inches in front of the flow. You will feel no change in the thrust. You can do it with an air compressor too if you want to test it for gas. Don't blow your hand off. Actually you do feel the change in thrust. So I have a water hose a full pressure pointing at the air. The I point at the wall a few inches away, massive thrust change bro. Not only that you get soaked from the splash back. There will be no change to the thrust, since the thrust is generated as the water exits the hose and doesn't depend on what the water hits afterwards. Try actually doing it, rather than imagining it and you'll see. |
| oniongrass User ID: 77403676 United States03/06/2019 01:07 AM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | ... Quoting: oniongrass Yeah, here are two proofs. (1) Look at any modern physics textbook that deals with rocketry. Or just look up "conservation of momentum" and see that it's considered a fundamental principle of physics. (2) Rockets work. Dude that’s not proof To prove this science to some dotards, we'd have to shoot them into space. That's impossible. There's this little problem called the Van Allen Radiation belts, which NASA admits it hasn't solved yet. Please describe how the Van Allen belts prevent a rocket from working. Be specific. . DON'T VAX, PROPHYLAX! ____________ There is no anger in Me: If one offers Me thorns and thistles, I will march to battle against him, And set all of them on fire. But if he holds fast to My refuge, He makes Me his friend; He makes Me his friend. (Isaiah 27:4-5) |
| oniongrass User ID: 77403676 United States03/06/2019 01:09 AM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | Last year a young math genius went through Newton's math. He found it to be in error on most every page, it did not result it did not compute. A failed theory with no proof a belief system at most. Quoting: Anonymous Coward 74625207 It was said he may have been the first person to ever go through the whole thing, remarkable. Science was lacking in never bringing it to task. When the reporters asked his professor about it he said, 'It doesn't matter that Newton's math is wrong the theory is still right. ha Come to find out Newton was bad at math also. Link? Newton was a co-inventor of calculus. Even if he made some errors, there was enough there to lead to useful conclusions which are generally correct. Newton was a giant of the field of physics. He was wrong to say that F=ma, because that doesn't work for bodies that are expelling mass. The correct fundamental principle is that F=dp/dt. But even though he was wrong, he was on the right track. . DON'T VAX, PROPHYLAX! ____________ There is no anger in Me: If one offers Me thorns and thistles, I will march to battle against him, And set all of them on fire. But if he holds fast to My refuge, He makes Me his friend; He makes Me his friend. (Isaiah 27:4-5) |
| Anonymous Coward User ID: 76901628 Canada03/06/2019 05:17 AM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | ... Quoting: Anonymous Coward 58747496 Fluids move due to pressure gradient force. The pressure broke apart the soda can and physically pushed it. If there is nothing to push she. The gas moves to low pressure, there is no opposite force Oh gawd. Can't believe this one dimensional thinking. Dude, here's a foolproof test you can do to prove you're wrong. You can do it with a hose and water under pressure. Turn the hose on and feel the thrust back caused by the water being expelled under pressure. Got that? Now, place your hand a couple of inches in front of the flow. You will feel no change in the thrust. You can do it with an air compressor too if you want to test it for gas. Don't blow your hand off. Actually you do feel the change in thrust. So I have a water hose a full pressure pointing at the air. The I point at the wall a few inches away, massive thrust change bro. Not only that you get soaked from the splash back. There will be no change to the thrust, since the thrust is generated as the water exits the hose and doesn't depend on what the water hits afterwards. Try actually doing it, rather than imagining it and you'll see. I’ve done this several times and probably many others have too when playing with the garden hose. Are you denying direct evidence? I’ll make a video when it gets warmer to show you. |
| Anonymous Coward User ID: 76901628 Canada03/06/2019 05:18 AM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | Last year a young math genius went through Newton's math. He found it to be in error on most every page, it did not result it did not compute. A failed theory with no proof a belief system at most. Quoting: Anonymous Coward 74625207 It was said he may have been the first person to ever go through the whole thing, remarkable. Science was lacking in never bringing it to task. When the reporters asked his professor about it he said, 'It doesn't matter that Newton's math is wrong the theory is still right. ha Come to find out Newton was bad at math also. Link? Newton was a co-inventor of calculus. Even if he made some errors, there was enough there to lead to useful conclusions which are generally correct. Newton was a giant of the field of physics. He was wrong to say that F=ma, because that doesn't work for bodies that are expelling mass. The correct fundamental principle is that F=dp/dt. But even though he was wrong, he was on the right track. Name some examples of bodies expelling mass? |
| Halcyon Dayz, FCD User ID: 76260827  Netherlands03/06/2019 07:39 AM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | What you think is irrelevant. If your reasoning based on your interpretation of scientific principles leads you to a DEMONSTRABLY wrong conclusion than your reasoning or your understanding of the relevant scientific principles (or both) must be wrong too. In science observation beats theory every time. Rocket propulsion works in space, why it does is secondary. You not understanding the why, or being very confused about it, doesn't change the facts. Classic, the shill is talking about actual science. Ad hominem deflection, IOW you don't have any actual arguments. Automatic loss for a compulsive loser. Tell us your egg theory again which explains how the universe came to be Quoting: Anonymous Tard 75409848 My "egg theory"? Maybe you should cure your scientific illiteracy before wading into a scientific discussion. I'd say incomplete rather than wrong. Reaching for the sky makes you taller. Hi! My name is Halcyon Dayz and I'm addicted to morans. |
| Anonymous Coward User ID: 77433193 Canada03/06/2019 12:50 PM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | You are expecting too much. As the less knowledgeable one (trust me, you are) you have a responsibility to read what's in this thread and/or do some outside research, maybe try an experiment to demonstrate some of the ideas (like conservation of momentum) to yourself. Come back with specific questions. "I don't understand why" something very specific. Or "I think this is wrong because" and then a very specific, targeted proof refuting something. Experiments were done and research was done. Hence the videos. I read through this thread and I see people make desperate attempts to show that rockets work in space but fail. No one has been able to honestly refute anything in the posted video You dont know what proof and refutation are. The proof is everywhere. There is no refutation by just making an incorrect claim based on your own misunderstanding. Math isn't wrong, your application, assumptions, and conclusions are. How is it a misunderstanding? Can you explain why it’s not correct? |
| The Rickest Rick Sanchez User ID: 75531924 United States03/06/2019 04:57 PM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | ... Quoting: oniongrass You are expecting too much. As the less knowledgeable one (trust me, you are) you have a responsibility to read what's in this thread and/or do some outside research, maybe try an experiment to demonstrate some of the ideas (like conservation of momentum) to yourself. Come back with specific questions. "I don't understand why" something very specific. Or "I think this is wrong because" and then a very specific, targeted proof refuting something. Experiments were done and research was done. Hence the videos. I read through this thread and I see people make desperate attempts to show that rockets work in space but fail. No one has been able to honestly refute anything in the posted video You dont know what proof and refutation are. The proof is everywhere. There is no refutation by just making an incorrect claim based on your own misunderstanding. Math isn't wrong, your application, assumptions, and conclusions are. How is it a misunderstanding? Can you explain why it’s not correct? I don't want to spend the effort to disprove a failed disproving. The burden is yours and it was not achieved. You basically gave up after flipping equations and describing a vague unrelated experiment. The universe is basically an animal. It grazes on the ordinary. It creates infinite idiots just to eat them. The Rickest Rick Sanchez comments are meant for entertainment purposes only and should not be construed to reflect the feelings and opinions, implied or expressed, of the author. |
| Anonymous Coward User ID: 74824455 Canada03/06/2019 06:53 PM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | ... Quoting: Anonymous Coward 77431484 Experiments were done and research was done. Hence the videos. I read through this thread and I see people make desperate attempts to show that rockets work in space but fail. No one has been able to honestly refute anything in the posted video You dont know what proof and refutation are. The proof is everywhere. There is no refutation by just making an incorrect claim based on your own misunderstanding. Math isn't wrong, your application, assumptions, and conclusions are. How is it a misunderstanding? Can you explain why it’s not correct? I don't want to spend the effort to disprove a failed disproving. The burden is yours and it was not achieved. You basically gave up after flipping equations and describing a vague unrelated experiment. So your too lazy to disprove the evidence provided so we should just take your word for it? Right |
| Anonymous Coward User ID: 74824455 Canada03/06/2019 08:26 PM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | |
| Anonymous Coward User ID: 76809044 United States03/06/2019 09:53 PM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | |
| 74444 User ID: 74444 United States03/06/2019 10:12 PM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | ... Quoting: The Rickest Rick Sanchez You dont know what proof and refutation are. The proof is everywhere. There is no refutation by just making an incorrect claim based on your own misunderstanding. Math isn't wrong, your application, assumptions, and conclusions are. How is it a misunderstanding? Can you explain why it’s not correct? I don't want to spend the effort to disprove a failed disproving. The burden is yours and it was not achieved. You basically gave up after flipping equations and describing a vague unrelated experiment. So your too lazy to disprove the evidence provided so we should just take your word for it? Right You've already demonstrated that there is *no proof* you will accept. So, what's the point? You handwave away every evidence. If I am incorrect, please spell out *completely* what specific evidence would prove *to you* that rockets work in space. If there is none, it is pointless to engage. |
| Anonymous Coward User ID: 77003244 Canada03/07/2019 06:07 AM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | ... Quoting: Anonymous Coward 77433193 How is it a misunderstanding? Can you explain why it’s not correct? I don't want to spend the effort to disprove a failed disproving. The burden is yours and it was not achieved. You basically gave up after flipping equations and describing a vague unrelated experiment. So your too lazy to disprove the evidence provided so we should just take your word for it? Right You've already demonstrated that there is *no proof* you will accept. So, what's the point? You handwave away every evidence. If I am incorrect, please spell out *completely* what specific evidence would prove *to you* that rockets work in space. If there is none, it is pointless to engage. But what proof have you provided? Fake edited and cut videos. So far you have neither Been able to debunk the video nor provide actual evidence of rockets in space. |
| Anonymous Coward User ID: 77003244 Canada03/07/2019 06:07 AM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | |
| Anonymous Coward User ID: 77120569 United States03/07/2019 06:25 AM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | Even this source says that it pushes off the atmosphere. Does physics teach fluid dynamics? Why is it all the chemists that realize rockets don’t work in space? [link to www.chemed.org (secure)] “According to Newton's Third Law of Motion, every action has an equal and opposite reaction. Therefore, as the gas is released from the balloon, it pushes against the outside air, and the outside air pushes back. As a result, the rocket is propelled forward by the opposing force.” |
| Anonymous Coward User ID: 77282832 United States03/07/2019 07:36 AM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | |
| Anonymous Coward User ID: 77375224 United States03/07/2019 07:46 AM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | Even this source says that it pushes off the atmosphere. Does physics teach fluid dynamics? Why is it all the chemists that realize rockets don’t work in space? Quoting: Anonymous Coward 77120569 [link to www.chemed.org (secure)] “According to Newton's Third Law of Motion, every action has an equal and opposite reaction. Therefore, as the gas is released from the balloon, it pushes against the outside air, and the outside air pushes back. As a result, the rocket is propelled forward by the opposing force.” That explanation is not correct for balloons. Balloons are not rockets. The body of the balloon changes shape; it becomes smaller as the gas escapes. The outside air pushes around the body of the balloon and makes it move forward, like squeezing a wet bar of soap in your hand propels the soap. The body of a rocket does not behave like a balloon. |
| Anonymous Coward User ID: 76808568 United States03/07/2019 08:45 AM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | Even this source says that it pushes off the atmosphere. Does physics teach fluid dynamics? Why is it all the chemists that realize rockets don’t work in space? Quoting: Anonymous Coward 77120569 [link to www.chemed.org (secure)] “According to Newton's Third Law of Motion, every action has an equal and opposite reaction. Therefore, as the gas is released from the balloon, it pushes against the outside air, and the outside air pushes back. As a result, the rocket is propelled forward by the opposing force.” That explanation is not correct for balloons. Balloons are not rockets. The body of the balloon changes shape; it becomes smaller as the gas escapes. The outside air pushes around the body of the balloon and makes it move forward, like squeezing a wet bar of soap in your hand propels the soap. The body of a rocket does not behave like a balloon. That’s not what nasa and mainstream science says [link to www.homesciencetools.com (secure)] See where this is going? You people have contradicted yourselves while going nuts tying to prove that rockets work in space. You just can’t do it because it’s a lie |
