thrust does not work in space

  • 203 Replies
  • 59988 Views

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

*

Offline Pmb

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • 1838
  • Physicist
    • View Profile
    • New England Science Constortium
Re: thrust does not work in space
« Reply #50 on: 15/09/2013 09:04:53 »
[quote author = dlorde]
The experiment is demonstrated every time a rocket fires in space - which happens often. Satellites, probes, space labs - they all do it.
[/quote]
« Last Edit: 17/09/2013 16:26:46 by Pmb »

*

lean bean

  • Guest
Re: thrust does not work in space
« Reply #51 on: 15/09/2013 11:09:40 »
someone just show me an experiment of a rocket working in a vacuum never mind the theory lets just see the reality .
Why show you 'videos/films' on the web, when you can just say they are using trick photography.

To read a description of an experiment and the given theory of why it works the way it does, is down to the reader's understanding of physics.

All people can do on the web is to offer acknowledged expert sites on such matters.
Or you may find 'non acknowledged' experts that have a good understanding and can lead you in the right direction to answering things.
You can say Nasa is using tricks, but that must be based on your personal understanding of physics to say Nasa is using tricks. So it's down to words not just pictures. :)

*

Offline alancalverd

  • Global Moderator
  • Neilep Level Member
  • *****
  • 4814
  • life is too short to drink instant coffee
    • View Profile
Re: thrust does not work in space
« Reply #52 on: 15/09/2013 14:03:45 »
Why do airliners fly so high? Because a reaction-powered machine works better when there's less air around? Or because Ryanair has money to burn on fuel that would be saved by flying lower? If elementary concepts of physics are beyond you, perhaps you understand the concept of profit?
helping to stem the tide of ignorance

*

Offline dlorde

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • 1441
  • ex human-biologist & software developer
    • View Profile
Re: thrust does not work in space
« Reply #53 on: 15/09/2013 14:46:47 »
The scary thing is that he seems to find it plausible that there's a multi-trillion dollar global conspiracy, that started many years before he was born, involving people working in schools, colleges, universities, research & engineering labs, the economic, financial, design, and manufacturing sectors of the aerospace industry, audiovisual fakery, media broadcasting, Earth sciences, remote sensing, weather prediction, satellite communications, planetary probes, SatNav, GPS, other stuff I've missed, etc...

Wait, that's nearly everything, right? Wow, this thing is bigger than religion... and all to fool people like him (i.e. those who can't do simple physics). But why? That's the real question to answer!

Alternatively, maybe he's a beginner's physics course short of an education. An introduction to critical thinking wouldn't go astray, either.

*

Offline Pmb

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • 1838
  • Physicist
    • View Profile
    • New England Science Constortium
Re: thrust does not work in space
« Reply #54 on: 15/09/2013 17:19:47 »
Quote from: dlorde
But why? That's the real question to answer!
Because he's not willing to learn. Didn't you notice that he refuses to answer any direct questions about his knowledge of physics?

*

Offline dlorde

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • 1441
  • ex human-biologist & software developer
    • View Profile
Re: thrust does not work in space
« Reply #55 on: 15/09/2013 20:42:16 »
Quote from: dlorde
But why? That's the real question to answer!
Because he's not willing to learn. Didn't you notice that he refuses to answer any direct questions about his knowledge of physics?
It's obvious he doesn't know (or pretends not to know) any physics; what I was asking him was why this vast global conspiracy is going on ;)

Which leads me to wonder whether the crossover point between conspiracy theory and plain paranoia is when the number of people involved in the conspiracy exceeds the number uninvolved it...

*

Offline Pmb

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • 1838
  • Physicist
    • View Profile
    • New England Science Constortium
Re: thrust does not work in space
« Reply #56 on: 15/09/2013 21:58:46 »
Quote from: dlorde
It's obvious he doesn't know (or pretends not to know) any physics; what I was asking him was why this vast global conspiracy is going on ;)
Yeah. I saw that. ;)  I think that mostly people like that are truely serious. They have this thing going on where they think they know more than everyone one else, including scientists, because they put some thought into it and came to different solutions and therefore the scientists must be wrong!! They refuse to learn physics because they assume it will corrupt their mind with nonsense. Ha ha ha!

*

truthseeker67

  • Guest
Re: thrust does not work in space
« Reply #57 on: 15/09/2013 22:01:56 »
By the way buddies Airplanes use less fuel at high altitude than they use at low altitude, because the air is thinner at high altitudes and therefore produces less air resistance to slow the airplane down thought i would explain that using my useless physics, so airplanes are more efficient at higher altitudes.

*

truthseeker67

  • Guest
Re: thrust does not work in space
« Reply #58 on: 15/09/2013 22:17:11 »
how can you believe NASA about anything.  when a flag blows in a breeze on the moon and so many other things that are simply not correct, too many inconsistencies for my liking and a Luna module that looks like an  activity scene made by primary school children and not to mention no blast crater from that all powerful rocket thrust,that didn't even leave dust on the feet of the lander how strange could that be.

*

Offline dlorde

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • 1441
  • ex human-biologist & software developer
    • View Profile
Re: thrust does not work in space
« Reply #59 on: 15/09/2013 22:19:30 »
By the way buddies Airplanes use less fuel at high altitude than they use at low altitude, because the air is thinner at high altitudes and therefore produces less air resistance to slow the airplane down thought i would explain that using my useless physics, so airplanes are more efficient at higher altitudes.
So does a jet aircraft become most efficient in space where there is no air resistance at all?

What about propeller driven planes? more efficient or less?

What do you think is the main difference between rocket engines and jet engines?

*

Offline Pmb

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • 1838
  • Physicist
    • View Profile
    • New England Science Constortium
Re: thrust does not work in space
« Reply #60 on: 15/09/2013 22:22:51 »
Quote from: truthseeker67
how can you believe NASA about anything.
We have no reason to believe they have anything to hide or anything to lie about. You're delusions and distrust with NASA are based on your ignorance of science. You, on the other hand, keep avoiding direct questions so we have every reason assume that you're hiding something. Plus many of us as scientists and know what we're doing while you on the other hand have no idea about science whatsoever.

And then there's the fact that Newton, Einstein, Maxwell, Galileo and Kepler were all around doing their thing long before NASA existed. Newton postulated his laws and demonstrated that they were true even before the USA was born.
« Last Edit: 15/09/2013 22:26:32 by Pmb »

*

Offline Pmb

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • 1838
  • Physicist
    • View Profile
    • New England Science Constortium
Re: thrust does not work in space
« Reply #61 on: 15/09/2013 22:24:02 »
By the way buddies Airplanes use less fuel at high altitude than they use at low altitude, because the air is thinner at high altitudes and therefore produces less air resistance to slow the airplane down thought i would explain that using my useless physics, so airplanes are more efficient at higher altitudes.
So does a jet aircraft become most efficient in space where there is no air resistance at all?

What about propeller driven planes? more efficient or less?

What do you think is the main difference between rocket engines and jet engines?
I'm begining to feel like a school kid by arguing with him since that's the way he argues, don't you a bit?

*

Offline dlorde

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • 1441
  • ex human-biologist & software developer
    • View Profile
Re: thrust does not work in space
« Reply #62 on: 15/09/2013 22:30:08 »
how can you believe NASA about anything.  when a flag blows in a breeze on the moon and so many other things that are simply not correct, too many inconsistencies for my liking and a Luna module that looks like an  activity scene made by primary school children and not to mention no blast crater from that all powerful rocket thrust,that didn't even leave dust on the feet of the lander how strange could that be.
You'll find the answers here.

*

Offline dlorde

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • 1441
  • ex human-biologist & software developer
    • View Profile
Re: thrust does not work in space
« Reply #63 on: 15/09/2013 22:32:47 »
I'm begining to feel like a school kid by arguing with him since that's the way he argues, don't you a bit?
It certainly feels like I'm talking to a school kid - one that's deliberately playing dumb.

He's got all the information he needs now; I suggest we leave him to it.

*

Offline Pmb

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • 1838
  • Physicist
    • View Profile
    • New England Science Constortium
Re: thrust does not work in space
« Reply #64 on: 15/09/2013 23:07:31 »
Quote from: dlorde
He's got all the information he needs now; I suggest we leave him to it.
One more. The article you linked to said "Did you think of an issue I didn't address? Send me an email and I will be sure to add it." so I did. Here is my response
Quote
We went to the Moon to at the height of the cold war so the Russians were keeping a close eye on those rocket launches. The radio transmissions from the Moon to Earth could not have been faked. They had to be coming from the moon. Had we tried then the Russians would have pointed out to everyone in the world that the transmissions were not comming from the moon.

He won't be able to explain that, that's for sure. And he won't even bother trying (since he never does).
« Last Edit: 15/09/2013 23:25:04 by Pmb »

*

Offline alancalverd

  • Global Moderator
  • Neilep Level Member
  • *****
  • 4814
  • life is too short to drink instant coffee
    • View Profile
Re: thrust does not work in space
« Reply #65 on: 16/09/2013 00:16:27 »
By the way buddies Airplanes use less fuel at high altitude than they use at low altitude, because the air is thinner at high altitudes and therefore produces less air resistance to slow the airplane down thought i would explain that using my useless physics, so airplanes are more efficient at higher altitudes.

So presumably a rocket-powered aircraft, which doesn't need air to burn its fuel, would  became increasingly efficient as the air got thinner, until....oh bugger, this is leading towards common sense. Obviously all the world's airlines have got it wrong, or are being paid by NASA to fly at uneconomic altitudes in order to cover up the global conspiracy about space flight.

The interesting thing is that not only the USA but Russia, the EU, China, India, Japan, and Korea are all part of the same conspiracy. Why? Because they recognise that Isaac Newton was the Antichrist.   
helping to stem the tide of ignorance

*

Offline Pmb

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • 1838
  • Physicist
    • View Profile
    • New England Science Constortium
Re: thrust does not work in space
« Reply #66 on: 16/09/2013 01:56:31 »
By the way buddies Airplanes use less fuel at high altitude than they use at low altitude, because the air is thinner at high altitudes and therefore produces less air resistance to slow the airplane down thought i would explain that using my useless physics, so airplanes are more efficient at higher altitudes.

So presumably a rocket-powered aircraft, which doesn't need air to burn its fuel, would  became increasingly efficient as the air got thinner, until....oh bugger, this is leading towards common sense. Obviously all the world's airlines have got it wrong, or are being paid by NASA to fly at uneconomic altitudes in order to cover up the global conspiracy about space flight.

The interesting thing is that not only the USA but Russia, the EU, China, India, Japan, and Korea are all part of the same conspiracy. Why? Because they recognise that Isaac Newton was the Antichrist.   

alancalverd - I really don't think that he gets the thing about planes at higher altitude.

*

Offline Supercryptid

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • 606
    • View Profile
    • http://www.angelfire.com/sc2/Trunko
Re: thrust does not work in space
« Reply #67 on: 16/09/2013 02:49:57 »
----
Jesus is coming soon. Be prepared for him.

*

Offline Pmb

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • 1838
  • Physicist
    • View Profile
    • New England Science Constortium
Re: thrust does not work in space
« Reply #68 on: 16/09/2013 02:51:22 »
It turns out that truthseeker67 is really an economist who claims that his hobby is cosmology. His site is here http://www.eioba.com/niebieskieucho/articles

truthseeker67 M'man. I love the doo!  :)

*

Offline bizerl

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • 279
    • View Profile
Re: thrust does not work in space
« Reply #69 on: 16/09/2013 07:15:53 »
Call me a sicko, but man I find these threads entertaining!
By the way buddies Airplanes use less fuel at high altitude than they use at low altitude, because the air is thinner at high altitudes and therefore produces less air resistance to slow the airplane down thought i would explain that using my useless physics, so airplanes are more efficient at higher altitudes.
If there's less air and therefore it is closer to being a vacuum, wouldn't the jets start to fail? After all, "thrust does not work in space". [:)]
I like the way that rockets need something to push against and therefore wont work in a vacuum, but when you push a large metal construction against something as solid and tangible as, oh, I don't know... air!, you can break the sound barrier several times over!
I guess, truthseeker, that if you admitted to the truth, you'd have to change your username.

*

Offline Pmb

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • 1838
  • Physicist
    • View Profile
    • New England Science Constortium
Re: thrust does not work in space
« Reply #70 on: 16/09/2013 07:40:59 »
Call me a sicko, but man I find these threads entertaining!
By the way buddies Airplanes use less fuel at high altitude than they use at low altitude, because the air is thinner at high altitudes and therefore produces less air resistance to slow the airplane down thought i would explain that using my useless physics, so airplanes are more efficient at higher altitudes.
If there's less air and therefore it is closer to being a vacuum, wouldn't the jets start to fail? After all, "thrust does not work in space". [:)]
I like the way that rockets need something to push against and therefore wont work in a vacuum, but when you push a large metal construction against something as solid and tangible as, oh, I don't know... air!, you can break the sound barrier several times over!
I guess, truthseeker, that if you admitted to the truth, you'd have to change your username.
I hope you're not on his side and believe that rocket's need air to push on? That's quite wrong. It makes no sense for the gases to know that they're going to push on air before they leave the combustion chamber and not reflect off of the interior walls and thus exchange the momentum of the gas with the momentum of the walls of the chamber? truthseeker67 is unable to grasp science or engineering, I hope you don't think the same way? It looks like you're joking but I wanted to make sure.

truthseeker67 - What are the odds that you're learn about how a rocket engine works and stop all this nonsense that all physics and physicists are wrong for some mysterious reason and learn how a rocket works. See http://exploration.grc.nasa.gov/education/rocket/TRCRocket/rocket_principles.html

After you fail to do that I have a question that you'll be unable to answer correctly - How does a gun work and why is there a kick produced by the gun when its fired?
« Last Edit: 16/09/2013 07:47:04 by Pmb »

*

Offline alancalverd

  • Global Moderator
  • Neilep Level Member
  • *****
  • 4814
  • life is too short to drink instant coffee
    • View Profile
Re: thrust does not work in space
« Reply #71 on: 16/09/2013 11:27:03 »
It turns out that truthseeker67 is really an economist
a discipline with no wrong answers, only "incomplete data in an inherently unpredictable market - but you wouldn't want to live in a controlled market, would you?"
 
Quote
who claims that his hobby is cosmology.
A field in which there is no possibility of a controlled experiment.

So he can't admit to talking nonsense, because that would jeopardise his career, and he won't be convinced by evidence because that implies experimentation rather guesswork string theory!

 
« Last Edit: 16/09/2013 11:30:47 by alancalverd »
helping to stem the tide of ignorance

*

Offline dlorde

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • 1441
  • ex human-biologist & software developer
    • View Profile
Re: thrust does not work in space
« Reply #72 on: 16/09/2013 12:52:20 »
This page might be of some interest: http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Moon_landing_hoax#Evidence_for_a_conspiracy
Thanks, that's a better one than the one I posted.

*

Offline dlorde

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • 1441
  • ex human-biologist & software developer
    • View Profile
Re: thrust does not work in space
« Reply #73 on: 16/09/2013 12:55:39 »
It turns out that truthseeker67 is really an economist who claims that his hobby is cosmology. His site is here http://www.eioba.com/niebieskieucho/articles
A graduate! here was I, thinking he was in his early teens...

Quote
truthseeker67 M'man. I love the doo!  :)
Er, yeah! :)

*

Offline bizerl

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • 279
    • View Profile
Re: thrust does not work in space
« Reply #74 on: 16/09/2013 23:11:28 »
I hope you're not on his side and believe that rocket's need air to push on? That's quite wrong. It makes no sense for the gases to know that they're going to push on air before they leave the combustion chamber and not reflect off of the interior walls and thus exchange the momentum of the gas with the momentum of the walls of the chamber? truthseeker67 is unable to grasp science or engineering, I hope you don't think the same way? It looks like you're joking but I wanted to make sure.

Yes. Sorry Pete, I am joking. Also, whoever used the example of the cube with the missing side, i LOVE that example. It explained it beautifully.

I was reading back to the initial argument that thrust is based on "weight". It's a bit like me saying that "I reckon time is based on unicorns, and therefore I have just proved it doesn't exist - can YOU see any unicorns?"

It sounds like something out of a Douglas Adams novel where as soon as something enters weightlessness, it ceases to exist.

*

Offline Pmb

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • 1838
  • Physicist
    • View Profile
    • New England Science Constortium
Re: thrust does not work in space
« Reply #75 on: 17/09/2013 17:15:40 »
Quote from: dlorde
The experiment is demonstrated every time a rocket fires in space - which happens often. Satellites, probes, space labs - they all do it.
That’s enough to prove to anybody that this is in fact that case, except truthseeker67 since he doesn’t understand the concept in the first case.

If I haven't mentioned this before I’ll do so now; he just can’t grasp Newton's third law which states that wherever there is an action there is an equal and opposite reaction. See http://scienceworld.wolfram.com/physics/NewtonsThirdLaw.html

Note: There are exceptions to this law such as in electrodynamics, but not in this case.

*

Offline alancalverd

  • Global Moderator
  • Neilep Level Member
  • *****
  • 4814
  • life is too short to drink instant coffee
    • View Profile
Re: thrust does not work in space
« Reply #76 on: 17/09/2013 18:12:16 »
Even if he did understand Newtonian physics, he still asserts that high orbits and free flight are the products of conspiracy and fakery, not real engineering achievements. He is clearly deluded. Any proper scientist knows that astronauts are borne aloft by noble thoughts and good fairies. I just wish he could convince my flight examiners, who always demand a very mundane demonstration of classical physics. 
helping to stem the tide of ignorance

*

Offline Pmb

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • 1838
  • Physicist
    • View Profile
    • New England Science Constortium
Re: thrust does not work in space
« Reply #77 on: 18/09/2013 02:02:11 »
Even if he did understand Newtonian physics, he still asserts that high orbits and free flight are the products of conspiracy and fakery, not real engineering achievements. He is clearly deluded. Any proper scientist knows that astronauts are borne aloft by noble thoughts and good fairies. I just wish he could convince my flight examiners, who always demand a very mundane demonstration of classical physics. 
Forgive me for not paying close attention (LOL!) but I haven't been following him in detail. Where did he make such claims?

*

lean bean

  • Guest
Re: thrust does not work in space
« Reply #78 on: 20/09/2013 19:40:59 »
Forgive me for not paying close attention (LOL!) but I haven't been following him in detail. Where did he make such claims?
Stay awake boy 

Look have you ever asked yourself why all the satalites and space station included are all only in orbit, there is not one item of any sort further than orbit because they cant get there. they call something a space station but in fact it is not in true space it is still in the earths boundarys which we call orbit and guess what thrust works there and guess why?
My bold

*

Offline CliffordK

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • 6321
  • Site Moderator
    • View Profile
Re: thrust does not work in space
« Reply #79 on: 21/09/2013 01:03:44 »
Look have you ever asked yourself why all the satalites and space station included are all only in orbit, there is not one item of any sort further than orbit because they cant get there. they call something a space station but in fact it is not in true space it is still in the earths boundarys which we call orbit and guess what thrust works there and guess why?
My bold
Not one item that isn't in orbit?

Voyager 1
Voyager 2
Pioneer 1
Pioneer 2

That adds up to at least 4.  And, I think there are a few more, not counting those probes that have been sent to other planets such as mars, either landing on the planet, getting destroyed in the atmosphere, or inserted into orbit around another planet. 

The International Space Station is in "orbit", rather than a non orbital trajectory because it was assembled in parts in space, and it is hard to get volunteers for Pluto flybys, especially when they turn the space heaters down to about 4K.

*

Offline dlorde

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • 1441
  • ex human-biologist & software developer
    • View Profile
Re: thrust does not work in space
« Reply #80 on: 21/09/2013 01:17:20 »
Not one item that isn't in orbit?

Voyager 1
Voyager 2
Pioneer 1
Pioneer 2

That adds up to at least 4.  And, I think there are a few more, not counting those probes that have been sent to other planets such as mars, either landing on the planet, getting destroyed in the atmosphere, or inserted into orbit around another planet. 
I did put up a link to a nice poster of missions earlier.

*

Offline Supercryptid

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • 606
    • View Profile
    • http://www.angelfire.com/sc2/Trunko
Re: thrust does not work in space
« Reply #81 on: 21/09/2013 02:23:47 »
Look have you ever asked yourself why all the satalites and space station included are all only in orbit, there is not one item of any sort further than orbit because they cant get there. they call something a space station but in fact it is not in true space it is still in the earths boundarys which we call orbit and guess what thrust works there and guess why?
My bold
Not one item that isn't in orbit?

Voyager 1
Voyager 2
Pioneer 1
Pioneer 2

That adds up to at least 4.  And, I think there are a few more, not counting those probes that have been sent to other planets such as mars, either landing on the planet, getting destroyed in the atmosphere, or inserted into orbit around another planet. 

The International Space Station is in "orbit", rather than a non orbital trajectory because it was assembled in parts in space, and it is hard to get volunteers for Pluto flybys, especially when they turn the space heaters down to about 4K.

He thinks that the Moon landings are a hoax and that NASA can't be trusted. He probably thinks that each and every one of those missions are faked and that there is a world-wide conspiracy in place to keep anyone from learning that.
----
Jesus is coming soon. Be prepared for him.

*

lean bean

  • Guest
Re: thrust does not work in space
« Reply #82 on: 21/09/2013 16:33:27 »
Can anyone find anything about the natural jets on comets affecting the comet in some way?
 I understand there must be some sort of cavern in which the contents quickly become gaseous in a confined space, resulting in pressure on all surfaces within the cavern, until one part 'gives'.
I could only find this...
Quote
Dr A'Hearn mentioned that if the comet "spins up" (i.e the jets increase the rotation rate), there is a possbility of it fragmenting (like C/2007 Q3). Will ground based scopes or the spacecraft continue to track 103P and for how long to see if this increase in spin rate occurs?
From NASA http://www.nasa.gov/connect/chat/hartley_chat.html

« Last Edit: 21/09/2013 16:43:19 by lean bean »

*

truthseeker67

  • Guest
Re: thrust does not work in space
« Reply #83 on: 23/09/2013 11:09:25 »
There is also a philosophical reason why NASA space rocketry is impossible: gas, via rocket engine exhaust or otherwise, has no effect, does no work, in a vacuum and cannot be used to move objects through space.

In 1852 scientist James Prescott Joule, for whom the unit of energy Joule is named, discovered that gas does no work in a vacuum http://www.etomica.org/app/modules/site ... ound2.html

If gas has an effect on objects in a vacuum I would expect to find an example in nature. All forces that man has access to exist in nature (including fission, fusion, chemical reactions, steam, etc...). We do not create forces we only discover them. In ancient times people thought a comet's tail was a gas jet pushing it along. Today I cannot find an example of an object moving through space via gas/jet propulsion although streams of gas and particles shooting into space exist. Saturn's moon Enceladus, for example, shoots a jet of water ice 500 KM into space. The diameter of the moon itself is only 500 KM. Does this jet have any effect? No. The jet as tall as the moon is wide goes harmlessly off into space. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Enceladus_%28moon%29

*

Offline dlorde

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • 1441
  • ex human-biologist & software developer
    • View Profile
Re: thrust does not work in space
« Reply #84 on: 23/09/2013 12:26:20 »
There is also a philosophical reason why NASA space rocketry is impossible: gas, via rocket engine exhaust or otherwise, has no effect, does no work, in a vacuum and cannot be used to move objects through space.
That's not a philosophical reason. It's an explicitly physical reason - and, of course, it's nonsense. Posting broken links won't make it less so.
« Last Edit: 23/09/2013 12:27:51 by dlorde »

*

Offline alancalverd

  • Global Moderator
  • Neilep Level Member
  • *****
  • 4814
  • life is too short to drink instant coffee
    • View Profile
Re: thrust does not work in space
« Reply #85 on: 23/09/2013 15:27:22 »
Quote
In 1852 scientist James Prescott Joule, for whom the unit of energy Joule is named, discovered that gas does no work in a vacuum

But a rocket in a vacuum is not a vaccum. The gas does work on the rocket, which is why it moves. Exactly as Newton stated, and as everyone who has ever designed, used or seen a rocket or jet engine, fired a gun, or even farted on an ice rink,  knows perfectly well.

Philosophy? Get a life.   
« Last Edit: 23/09/2013 15:28:58 by alancalverd »
helping to stem the tide of ignorance

*

lean bean

  • Guest
Re: thrust does not work in space
« Reply #86 on: 23/09/2013 20:42:08 »
Today I cannot find an example of an object moving through space via gas/jet propulsion  although streams of gas and particles shooting into space exist. Saturn's moon Enceladus, for example, shoots a jet of water ice 500 KM into space.

The jets on Enceladus were discovered by the interplanetary spaceprobe Cassini. How did Cassini get to Saturn and its moon Enceladus, if thrust doesn't work in space?

Quote
The plumes of water vapour were discovered by Cassini in 2005 and seemed to be related to the tiger stripes, but their precise source was unknown until now.
From http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn12770-source-of-saturn-moons-mysterious-jets-pinpointed.html
« Last Edit: 23/09/2013 21:00:59 by lean bean »

*

Offline dlorde

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • 1441
  • ex human-biologist & software developer
    • View Profile
Re: thrust does not work in space
« Reply #87 on: 23/09/2013 21:53:49 »
The jets on Enceladus were discovered by the interplanetary spaceprobe Cassini. How did Cassini get to Saturn and its moon Enceladus, if thrust doesn't work in space?
Ah, hoist by his own petard, methinks! :)

*

truthseeker67

  • Guest
Re: thrust does not work in space
« Reply #88 on: 23/09/2013 22:14:44 »
Gas does no work in a vacuum. It is only a passive participant and not an active force in space. We cannot use it as the basis for space travel. Bottling up gas and shooting it out of a tiny nozzle won't change its basic physical properties inside a vacuum, won't suddenly invalidate the laws of thermodynamics.

The theory of space travel based on gas jets and/or liquid propellants is a science fiction from the 1800's (Jules Verne et. al.) similar to the philosopher's stone and other magical, mystical pursuits we now look down upon. There is also the matter of the faked/fraudulent results of rocket pioneers such as Goddard which I will get to later.

If you ask why this is hoax is still going on it is because science has become a religion and NASA it's church. Specifically space travel is one of the Holiest of Holies. Try debunking a religion/cult and see how far you get. Once someone has been indoctrinated, invested themselves in its beliefs, it is nearly impossible for them to divest. For years I believed that space travel was the pinnacle of man's achievement. Now I have to wonder if any rocket has ever been past as far as we can throw it up from the ground.
« Last Edit: 23/09/2013 22:28:53 by truthseeker67 »

*

Offline dlorde

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • 1441
  • ex human-biologist & software developer
    • View Profile
Re: thrust does not work in space
« Reply #89 on: 23/09/2013 22:36:41 »
... Once someone has been indoctrinated, invested themselves in its beliefs, it is nearly impossible for them to divest.
You've certainly convinced me of that !

I blame Newton, with his stupid 3rd Law.

But what about the jets from Enceladus discovered by Cassini? How did Cassini get there to discover them?
« Last Edit: 23/09/2013 22:41:45 by dlorde »

*

Offline alancalverd

  • Global Moderator
  • Neilep Level Member
  • *****
  • 4814
  • life is too short to drink instant coffee
    • View Profile
Re: thrust does not work in space
« Reply #90 on: 23/09/2013 23:01:24 »
Gas does no work in a vacuum.

There's little point in carrying on this discussion if you don't read the replies.  See #85 above.
helping to stem the tide of ignorance

*

Offline Supercryptid

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • 606
    • View Profile
    • http://www.angelfire.com/sc2/Trunko
Re: thrust does not work in space
« Reply #91 on: 24/09/2013 04:07:09 »
I still want to see him directly address the cube argument that lean bean posted earlier. I find it kind of funny how he just brushed it off by saying "I can see what you mean with the cube" and leaving it at that. What? Can't find a good way to argue against it?
----
Jesus is coming soon. Be prepared for him.

*

Offline Pmb

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • 1838
  • Physicist
    • View Profile
    • New England Science Constortium
Re: thrust does not work in space
« Reply #92 on: 24/09/2013 04:13:16 »
Look have you ever asked yourself why all the satalites and space station included are all only in orbit, there is not one item of any sort further than orbit because they cant get there. they call something a space station but in fact it is not in true space it is still in the earths boundarys which we call orbit and guess what thrust works there and guess why?
My bold
Good Lord! The man doesn't even know what it means to be in space or in orbit

*

Offline Pmb

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • 1838
  • Physicist
    • View Profile
    • New England Science Constortium
Re: thrust does not work in space
« Reply #93 on: 24/09/2013 04:14:28 »
Look have you ever asked yourself why all the satalites and space station included are all only in orbit, there is not one item of any sort further than orbit because they cant get there. they call something a space station but in fact it is not in true space it is still in the earths boundarys which we call orbit and guess what thrust works there and guess why?
My bold
Not one item that isn't in orbit?

Voyager 1
Voyager 2
Pioneer 1
Pioneer 2

That adds up to at least 4.  And, I think there are a few more, not counting those probes that have been sent to other planets such as mars, either landing on the planet, getting destroyed in the atmosphere, or inserted into orbit around another planet. 

The International Space Station is in "orbit", rather than a non orbital trajectory because it was assembled in parts in space, and it is hard to get volunteers for Pluto flybys, especially when they turn the space heaters down to about 4K.

Don't forget the many many satellites which are in geosyncrhonous orbit around the earth

*

Offline Pmb

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • 1838
  • Physicist
    • View Profile
    • New England Science Constortium
Re: thrust does not work in space
« Reply #94 on: 24/09/2013 04:16:14 »
There is also a philosophical reason ...
You've lost all credibility now that you've demonstrated a complete lack of understanding of nearly all areas of physics. You have nothing to share that I want to know and I'm certain everyone else feels the same way.

*

Offline bizerl

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • 279
    • View Profile
Re: thrust does not work in space
« Reply #95 on: 24/09/2013 05:21:36 »
Gas does no work in a vacuum. It is only a passive participant and not an active force in space. We cannot use it as the basis for space travel. Bottling up gas and shooting it out of a tiny nozzle won't change its basic physical properties inside a vacuum, won't suddenly invalidate the laws of thermodynamics.

The theory of space travel based on gas jets and/or liquid propellants is a science fiction from the 1800's (Jules Verne et. al.) similar to the philosopher's stone and other magical, mystical pursuits we now look down upon. There is also the matter of the faked/fraudulent results of rocket pioneers such as Goddard which I will get to later.

If you ask why this is hoax is still going on it is because science has become a religion and NASA it's church. Specifically space travel is one of the Holiest of Holies. Try debunking a religion/cult and see how far you get. Once someone has been indoctrinated, invested themselves in its beliefs, it is nearly impossible for them to divest. For years I believed that space travel was the pinnacle of man's achievement. Now I have to wonder if any rocket has ever been past as far as we can throw it up from the ground.

I realise I'm trying to enlighten a dead horse here but surely the gas itself is of little importance in the thrust of a spaceship. It is the explosion inside the ship (and therefore not even in a vacuum if it matters - which it doesn't) which drives the gas out through the jet on one side of the ship, but doesn't drive the gas out of any other wall in the engine and therefore the ship has no choice but to move in the direction that the gas is not leaking out of. This was the beautiful cube example from earlier.

You can't see that you've indoctrinated yourself to believe this fallacy about thrust in space blindly, without analysing the evidence around you and providing alternate theorys to explain the observations.

*

Offline Pmb

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • 1838
  • Physicist
    • View Profile
    • New England Science Constortium
Re: thrust does not work in space
« Reply #96 on: 24/09/2013 07:32:29 »
Quote from: bizerl
You can't see that you've indoctrinated yourself to believe this fallacy about thrust in space blindly, without analysing the evidence around you and providing alternate theorys to explain the observations.
We've all accepted that as a given at this point.

*

Offline CitronBleu

  • First timers
  • *
  • 4
    • View Profile
Re: thrust does not work in space
« Reply #97 on: 24/06/2014 13:59:36 »
Hello TNS forum members,

I am interested in the problematic posed by this thread and wish to continue the discussion.

... it's down to words not just pictures. :)

Indeed, dear Beany.

Imagine a hollow cube in interstellar space, at the centre of this cube there is an explosion. Each inner wall of the cube will receive an equal pressure (push) from the expanding gasses of that explosion, and so the cube does not move in any direction.

Take away one wall of that cube, and repeat the central explosion.

Again, the gaseous particles hit all walls with equal pressure except the missing wall. The pressure on the wall opposite that missing wall is not countered, and so the cube moves in the direction opposite to the missing wall.
Thrust in interstellar space.

Beany,

You assume time and space have no affect on the pressure produced against the wall opposite the missing wall by the explosion.

EDIT for clarity and grammar
« Last Edit: 24/06/2014 14:13:38 by CitronBleu »

*

Offline PmbPhy

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • 2788
    • View Profile
Re: thrust does not work in space
« Reply #98 on: 24/06/2014 17:27:13 »
Quote from: CitronBleu
You assume time and space have no affect on the pressure produced against the wall opposite the missing wall by the explosion.
That's more than a mere assumption; it's an empirical fact and conforms to the laws of physics. Beany is describing the implications of Newton’s third law – where there is an action there is always an equal and opposite reaction. See
http://scienceworld.wolfram.com/physics/NewtonsThirdLaw.html

The box in Beany’ s example is a simplified form of a combustion chamber. Here’s an even simpler example; if you through a ball against a wall the ball will bounce off the wall. That happens because the ball exerts a force on the wall. In response to the force exerted on the ball by the wall, according to Newton’s third law, the ball exerts an equal and opposite force on the wall. That’s one of the most well accepted facts in all of physics. This has been a well-established empirical fact for well over 300 years now. A great deal of what happens in nature is based on this fact.

The topic of this thread is how thrust affects a rocket. The opening post was off off about all of this. We (or at least I) corrected him. It should have been obvious to him that if he were right then all the rockets we've used to explore space would never have worked. The space shuttle wouldn’t have been able to do all the things that we know that it did, we'd never have been able to send probes to Mars and most of the other planets in the solar system and we’d never have a Global Positioning System (GPS) that many people use nowadays. Very simply put, thrust works be bouncing material off of a one of the rear combustion chambers wall. This exerts a force on that wall which is then transmitted by the structure of the rocket to the rest of the rocket. Nasa has a web page online on this subject at
http://exploration.grc.nasa.gov/education/rocket/rktth1.html



Then we were insulted for our efforts with the claim that all cranks use, i.e. that we're all brain washed and can't think for ourselves, which is utter nonsense. Part of a physicists training is lab work where we experimentally explore what we learn in class. So we aren’t merely told these things but are expected to observe them in the laboratory for ourselves. The person who created this thread based all of his claims with the assumption that is all based on the following assertion
Quote
thrust equals = weight in order to have weight we need gravity….thrust=0 because without gravity there is no weight behind the thrust to cause a reaction so no movement would take place.
which is quite wrong for the reason stated above. I have to say that it’s quite irritating when people with essentially zero formal training in physics comes here to claim that all the physicists in the world during the last 300+ years are all wrong and only he is right. That’s arrogance taken to the extreme.

Here’s how he argued it
Quote
look when water comes out of a hosepipe with high pressure it is simply chucking out
weight, and thrust is weight why do you think rocket engines are said to create pounds of thrust,
This statement proves that he doesn’t know what he’s talking about. Recall that NASA used rocket sleds to train astronauts. The sled had a rocket engine on it and when ignited the rocket engine exerted a force on the sled accelerating it down the track. The only weight operating here is the force exerted by gravity in the vertical direction. But the force on the rocket sled exerted a force in the horizontal direction which means according to him it wouldn’t work. Also he thinks that the term pounds of thrust refers to weight which is quite false and actually a quite ignorant assumption. In the context in which he used it the term pound refers to a unit of force. See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Weight and scroll down to where it says Pound and other non-SI units
Quote
In United States customary units, the pound can be either a unit of force or a unit of mass
We would have explained this to him but he didn’t come here to learn. He came here to spread his “theory” which we explained to him was wrong and why it was wrong. He wasn’t receptive to learning though.

*

Offline CitronBleu

  • First timers
  • *
  • 4
    • View Profile
Re: thrust does not work in space
« Reply #99 on: 25/06/2014 05:23:43 »
Quote from: CitronBleu
You assume time and space have no affect on the pressure produced against the wall opposite the missing wall by the explosion.
That's more than a mere assumption; it's an empirical fact and conforms to the laws of physics. Beany is describing the implications of Newton’s third law – where there is an action there is always an equal and opposite reaction.

Hi PmbPhy,

To what empirical fact are you referring ? To what laws of physics does this fact conform ? My assumption, shared by others, is that man has never achieved flight beyond a hypothetical 80-120 Km altitude.

This empirical fact must have been discovered early in the years which led to the formulation and then to the development of the space conquest narrative (Which I will call SCN for short.).

Quote
The box in Beany’ s example is a simplified form of a combustion chamber. Here’s an even simpler example; if you through a ball against a wall the ball will bounce off the wall. That happens because the ball exerts a force on the wall. In response to the force exerted on the ball by the wall, according to Newton’s third law, the ball exerts an equal and opposite force on the wall. That’s one of the most well accepted facts in all of physics. This has been a well-established empirical fact for well over 300 years now. A great deal of what happens in nature is based on this fact.

Three hundred years ? That is it ? You are right, humanity has never been known to be wrong for 300 years. Has sir Isaac Newton visited outer space perhaps to test the validity of his theories on classical mechanics ?

Quote
The topic of this thread is how thrust affects a rocket. The opening post was off off about all of this. We (or at least I) corrected him.

And right you did.

Quote
It should have been obvious to him that if he were right then all the rockets we've used to explore space would never have worked. The space shuttle wouldn’t have been able to do all the things that we know that it did, we'd never have been able to send probes to Mars and most of the other planets in the solar system and we’d never have a Global Positioning System (GPS) that many people use nowadays.

These postulates are all part of my assumption.

The SCN presents all the major components of what can be defined as religion. Man lives among the gods (Jupiter, Pluto, etc.), human colonization of other planets will guide mankind to salvation, satellites will save us, etc.

Quote
Then we were insulted for our efforts with the claim that all cranks use, i.e. that we're all brain washed and can't think for ourselves, which is utter nonsense.

I thoroughly agree with your statement. You are among some of the brightest and most stimulating human beings on the planet, and true heirs to Thales of Militus.

Quote
Part of a physicists training is lab work where we experimentally explore what we learn in class. So we aren’t merely told these things but are expected to observe them in the laboratory for ourselves.

PmbPhy , are you familiar with Aesop's fable The astronomer who fell in a well ?

The ending concludes as below :

"Hark ye, old fellow, why, in striving to pry into what is in heaven, do you not manage to see what is on earth ?"