NASA Thrust Equation gets destroyed.

The action of the exhaust leaving the rocket nozzle produces an opposite reaction of the rocket traveling in the opposite direction. I'm sorry you're too stupid to understand basic physics but Rockets do work in space and they have been filmed working in Space by amateurs including myself.

men on the moon cars in space zero thrust rockets, ha

Where’s the proof Astro? You keep saying you have it but you fail to provide. Edited vids from nasa isn’t proof.

See? You avoid my challenge altogether. When Astro provided motion captures of a satellite firing a thruster in space taken by a telescope, you call it fake (with no evidence to, of course, back that up). When you can see the ISS in orbit with your naked eye, and Space X docking with it, you yell fake again. You won't even go to sites identifying satellites you can see from your very spot on Earth and *look up.* There is *no evidence* you'll accept. None. If you want to prove me wrong, spell out exactly what evidence you WOULD accept. And imagine my shock when you don't.

*What proof do you find acceptable?* Be specific.

rockets and balloons both use a type of propulsion
called "Jet Propulsion"

simple.
walla.

Proof, to me, of rockets working in a vacuum, would be a small, bottle-rocket, suspended on wires in the middle of that YUGE NASA vacuum chamber facility.

Not some little bell-jar.

Before the expelled gases can form an "atmosphere."

Know what I am saying?

The nasa equation includes an assumption that op is not acounting for. The exit velocity came from a relative velocity of zero to exit velocity. That is acceleration, not constant velocity. The acceleration of the fuel is the force. Doesnt matter if its in water, air, or nothing. The op is not keeping track of time units in his assumptions.

But, by your own words, you would be using the giant NASA vacuum chamber. Doesn't the fact that it belongs to NASA invalidate the experiment to you?

an expelling balloon would fly very nicely.

I expect it would (though a tougher balloon might be necessary in a vacuum). But I am trying to gauge what experiments the believer would find acceptable, and trying to nip potential "outs" before an experiment is even designed. Already, the bar has been set quite high that it would have to be the largest vacuum chamber in the world, because all other vacuums are, apparently, too small. That's a tall order.

Materials:

Gas lines and connections
Air compressor or CO2 gas cylinders
Accelerometer to measure acceleration and speed of the miniature car
Pressure Regulators and Gauges
Air pressure powered miniature car with pressure regulator
Vacuum Chamber
Vacuum Pump (to achieve at least 1 Torr vacuum)

The miniature car will be powered by regulated gas and the acceleration of the car will be measured. The thrust produced by the car will be measured by it's acceleration in three different conditions, vacuum, atmospheric pressure and high pressure.

Hypothesis: Thrust will have a positive linear relationship with the pressure of the chamber. No thrust or acceleration in vacuum conditions and maximum thrust or acceleration under high pressure conditions.

Found this on Twitter of some guy asking for money.

well, maybe if they open the gate-door quick :)

I was thinking a WHOOSH rocket in the giant vacuum chamber.

[link to www.grc.nasa.gov (secure)]

No accusations of secret motors moving car forward, etc. You also wouldn't have to worry about it smashing into the walls of the chamber.

one video was a screenshot of him plying Starcraft. The second video the rocket didn’t leave earth

How about a simple experiment?

too dumbed down and mind controlled to "care"...#apathy

*WHAT* simple experiment would the believer consider *acceptable proof?*

Something that shows an equal and opposite force from gas movement due due to pressure gradient force.

so, then, they shot-off all of those Saturn-5 Rockets
for what purpose, again?

To fool people and take their money through taxes.

Why don’t you have any evidence?

Bullshit in both accusations. The Falcon Heavy boosters reached 100 km altitude, they had no problem reversing course using their rocket engines in a vacuum better than a laboratory vacuum chamber. The other video is not a video game, it's real footage too.

[link to russianspaceweb.com]

Like *WHAT?* Spell out every step of an experiment you would accept. *WHAT* would show an equal and opposite force from gas movement due due to pressure gradient force *TO YOU?*

so, then, God made all this high technology and nintendo and
Xbox, and stuff, and then pasted a paper Moon on the Dome?

That is up you to discover ain’t it mate?

What bollocks.
The thing didn’t even go to
Space

That's not the way science works. I am asking a pretty straightforward question. After all, if there is *no evidence* that will change one's mind at all; if there is quite literally nothing that can do it, the conversation is kind of at an end, isn't it?

So, I ask again: Spell out every step of an experiment you would accept. *WHAT* would show an equal and opposite force from gas movement due due to pressure gradient force *TO YOU?* If you can't answer this straightforward question rationally, just admit it.

That which can be asserted without evidence can be dismissed without evidence. The evidence shows that the thing went to space, it was witnessed by thousands of people, and Astro filmed it, firsthand, uncut from takeoff to landing. If that isn't acceptable evidence to you, pray, what is?

By comparison, you offer *nothing* in the way of evidence that the Falcon Heavy 'didn't even go to space.' See how that works?

Plenty of evidence has been provided that rockets do not work in space. Now the ball is in your court to prove that they do.