0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
the reason why thrust cant work is simplethrust equals = weight in order to have weight we need gravity.
look when water comes out of a hosepipe with high pressure it is simply chucking outweight, and thrust is weight ..
yes the forces are different but lets get back to the thrust in space issue . could a water rocket under high pressure when forcing out its charge into space move forward, would it be said that the rocket would push itself away from its own charge rather than pushing against the void of space in order to move because on earth the charge of water would have weight behind it but would the charge of water in space have weight too!. like on earth a hosepipe will take off under thrust if not held down because its chucking out weight in the form of pounds of thrust . The more weight it chucks out the faster it wants to go up. Can this weight ratio apply in space where weightlessness dominates .
In space, objects have no weight but still have the same mass.
thing is man never went to the moon in the first place alone other planets. For a start when you enter into space the radiation is so strong nothing could survive the trip and live to tell the tale.
thrust equals = weight
thing is man never went to the moon in the first place alone other planets. For a start when you enter into space the radiation is so strong nothing could survive the trip and live to tell the tale. Watch this folks even if you think its not true its still good from a science fiction point of view enjoy. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1Ra40cCm-BQ
the reason why thrust cant work is simple thrust equals = weight in order to have weight we need gravity.see its like this in space everything weighs nothing so i would say a rocket weighs 0or put like this rocket =0 thrust=0 because without gravity there is no weight behind the thrust
After seeing the evidence of fakery in NASA pictures and videos I decided to investigate the theoretical basis of rockets in space. What I found on the Internet were mainly tricks, frauds and sleights of hand, name-calling and attacks used to confuse the issue and hide the facts. Bypassing all of that and doing original research I have come to the conclusion that rockets cannot function in space according the descriptions/formulas used by NASA and related parties.
of course the satellites are up there if you fired a canon ball from a massive gun that be up there too heheh only joking .
the thrust of a rocket engine has to have something to push against it cant push against its self.
The problem with applying Newton’s 3rd is that the rocket’s propellant does not generate force in a vacuum according to the laws of physics and chemistry.
Free Expansion states that when a pressurized gas is exposed to a vacuum the gas expanding into the vacuum without any work being done. The gas is not “pulled” or “sucked” into the vacuum nor is it “pushed” out of the high-pressure container. In other words no work is done,
... when i look at photos of satellites in space the backgrounds are always completely black no stars are ever present in the pics look at this one of the Hubble telescope taken from the shuttle heres the link look at the pic and enlarge it see what you think http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hubble_Space_Telescope
when i started this post i never doubted that satellites were not up there. Of course i know they orbit the earth. The topic is thrust doesn't work in space true space and all the satellites are in lower orbit where i do believe thrust works.
Why did Chuck Yeager not join the space program? Did he know it was a hoax?
hi leanbean i can see what you mean with the cube it just when i look at photos of satellites in space the backgrounds are always completely black no stars are ever present in the pics look at this one of the Hubble telescope taken from the shuttle heres the link look at the pic and enlarge it see what you think http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hubble_Space_Telescope
hi leanbean i can see what you mean with the cube
the reason why thrust cant work is simplethrust equals = weight in order to have weight we need gravity.see its like this in space everything weighs nothing so i would say a rocket weighs 0or put like this rocket =0
look when water comes out of a hosepipe with high pressure it is simply chucking outweight, ..
…and thrust is weight ..
.. do you think rocket engines are said to create pounds of thrust,…
… so then what are pounds …
.....see pounds are weight.;.
weight - the weight of an object is usually taken to be the force on the object due to gravity.
The weight of a body is meant to be the forces (e.g. the compression of a spring scale) required to either support the body in a gravitational field (gravitational weight) or to accelerate a body relative to an inertial system.
..because without gravity there is no weight behind the thrust.Oy vey! You keep saying this and it’s not true.The rest of what you say is nonsense.
could you imagine all the heat the vessels would absorb in space even with the protection they claim they have, keeping them cool just on batteries or whatever i know they use materials to reflect heat but even a mirror in the sun can get very hot. The outer shell of a spacecraft is acting a bit like a flask but sooner or later that heat is coming through. Read about the damage and problems the sun and radiation causes the satellites in orbit.
The fundamental problem seems to be that our correspondent does not understand the difference between mass and weight. Therefore any talk of force and momentum is wasted on him. Clearly the last 2000 years of scientific discovery and education have not penetrated the fog of misunderstanding perpetrated by Aristotle, Galileo died in vain, and Newton was just another farmer with an orchard. Fortunately for the rest of us, Newtonian physics seems to work pretty well everywhere. But there's no point in arguing against a conviction. Just beware of anyone calling himself Truthseeker who offers to fly, drive or shoot anything for you.
... how could this be accomplished using the same rockets that are meant to propel the ship via thrust against air pressure?
If there were a successful chemical explosion or comparable force outside the craft, and at its rear, it should propel the craft forward at least a small amount.
However, if the explosion is internal — as we are led to believe — this would cause equal work in all directions and hence do nothing except stress the inside of the craft.
In other words, the amusing little jets of gas we see exiting the craft for 'course correction' cannot possibly be what they look like: just a gas being released into the vacuum. They must instead be representations of an internal, highly controlled and precise explosive force aimed at the inside of the craft itself,
This is all basic school-level physics.
someone just show me an experiment of a rocket working in a vacuum never mind the theory lets just see the reality .
]The experiment is demonstrated every time a rocket fires in space - which happens often. Satellites, probes, space labs - they all do it.