Quote:
You have presented a physics proof you say establishes that rockets cannot provide momentum thrust in a vacuum. You have failed to address the several people who have shown the simple error you've made. It is unclear what relevance cinematography has to that proof. You have lately asserted that no "unedited video of rockets in space" exists. You have failed to show how that is relevant to your proof. You have even failed to show that your assertion is true. It would help us understand your argument if you would, in addition to blurting out these claims, show how they tie into some overall conclusion. |
Quote:
|
Quote:
If the air 'pushing off your face' came out of a rocket, you would feel it! :) |
Quote:
Quote:
|
Quote:
There is such a thing as fiction, so everything is obviously fiction ... |
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
I suppose you're going to quibble about if this counts as "in space": https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9HQfauGJaTs |
Quote:
However, how you release the pressure matters a great deal in how much momentum there is in it. And that's where the momentum term in your equation comes from. Specifically, if you release the pressure in a way that creates a unidirectional uniform flow, that flow has net momentum in one direction, whereas the net momentum in an expanding volume of gas is zero. You don't get to ignore the effect of the de Laval nozzle just because it is inconvenient to your proof or your understanding of how it was refuted. Pressure released through such a nozzle creates momentum in one direction. Newton's law says there must be equivalent but opposite momentum, and that is what results in thrust. |
Quote:
|
Quote:
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
Bonus question: you do understand that NASA did not invent the equations of motion, nor the equations of rocketry, and that spacecraft are routinely operated by civil, military, and commercial organizations from many nations? Right? |
Quote:
It's actually kind of refreshing to have a proper old-school CTist posting again. Demanding video of rockets in space, but likely to reject the video as faked because rockets can't work in space. |
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
C'mon all you science guys! There is a video! This trumps all of your sciencey mumbo jumbo. Rockets don't work and never have. You just have to believe hard enough.
|
Quote:
|
why Is there no opposite force when smoke rises up. Shouldn’t the smoke from a campfire push off the ground?
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Yet another case of not understanding basic principles. I don't blame him though. People learn 'action equals reaction', but the implication of the fact are hard to grasp. And not taught well most of the time.
One of the implications for example is, that every closed system maintains its center of gravity. That also applies to rocket in space. You start with rocket full of fuel, standing still in vacuum of space ('standing still' in some frame of reference). You mark position of the enter of gravity of the rocket, including fuel. Then you fire the rocket. The fuel burns, shoots out of the rocket, and the rocket moves in the opposite direction. Now, at any time, if you take the rocket (moving in one direction), and the byproducts of the burning (moving in opposite direction), the center of gravity of this system stays still in the same spot in the original frame of reference. Things like that are IMHO really counter-intuitive. And some could even argue, that rocket indeed does not work, because the system did not move. Just parts of the system did move in opposite direction, compared to some others. The rocket engine is thus not device to move stuff. It's device to expand stuff ;-) |
Quote:
Do you think there isn't any net pressure on the ground from the expanding gasses in the flame, and if so, why do you think that? ETA: But the smoke is rising due to buoyancy. Any initial acceleration at the flame would have almost immediately been lost to air drag. |
You can’t prove anything
All you can pick at is that I used nasa. Well I got the equation from NASA’s website |
Quote:
Quote:
|
And gas moving out of the chamber is due to pressure gradient force
|
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
Now for my balloon & steel plate: Imagine you have a big vacuum with a balloon sitting just to the left of a big vertical steel plate. Now, pop the balloon. Will the expanding gas exert any net force on the steel plate? |
Quote:
Quote:
You still haven’t answered my questions and counterexamples, by the way. Will you? |
All times are GMT -7. The time now is 01:46 AM. |
Powered by vBulletin. Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
© 2015-24, TribeTech AB. All Rights Reserved.