What does a rocket push against in space?

a reply to: UpIsNowDown

So many experiments must have been fine in those labs. Sure they could show a simple experiment of an equal and opposite force from gas movement due to pressure gradient force.

a reply to: NicSign

Ok then show one

originally posted by: NicSign
a reply to: NicSign

Ok then show one

Rockets in a Vacuum Chamber - Newton's third law of motion Visualized
m.youtube.com...

a reply to: NicSign

Ok, instead of just posting garbage like that empty statement of yours, how about you specifically state what is fake? That footage has been put since the 1960s, long before the CGI you think is your get out clause existed.

At the end of the footage you can see Florida with a very distinctive weather system over it. That system is visible in the weather satellite images taken on the day that rocket was launched, as shown at the end of this page:

onebigmonkey.com...

Prove your case or everyone will see how empty your argument is.

a reply to: NicSign

It’s has been proven between two threads in many ways rockets do produce thrust in a vacuum and are used in a vacuum to deploy payloads that are the backbone of may utilized technologies. GPS and satellite phones just being a few examples. Never mind numerous space missions being tracked and transmitting data.

At this point, your total lack of understanding is well documented, and your ignorance confirmed.

Stating rockets cannot produce thrust in a vacuum is willful ignorance, and a blatant falsehood.

Saying people are lying without providing evidence is slander.

originally posted by: NicSign
a reply to: neutronflux

So then when wind blows on the back of your head why doesn’t the air in front of you push off off your face as it moves away from you?

Because it's a stupid analogy that does not have anything to do with thrust from a rocket chamber.

Some of the wind is sent straight back. Some of the wind will be diverted round your head. The air in front of your face will be pulled away from it thanks to the pressure differentials created.

Some of the air might even be diverted into the space between your ears.

originally posted by: neutronflux

originally posted by: NicSign
a reply to: NicSign

Ok then show one

Rockets in a Vacuum Chamber - Newton's third law of motion Visualized
m.youtube.com...

So the chamber fills up with smoke and you still think it’s a vacuum? You can literally see the smoke start moving in the same direction as the rocket showing that the smoke is actually pushing the rocket

a reply to: OneBigMonkeyToo

Pulled away from the face? I thought it pushed off your face like the rocket pushes the exhaust?

originally posted by: NicSign

originally posted by: neutronflux

originally posted by: NicSign
a reply to: NicSign

Ok then show one

Rockets in a Vacuum Chamber - Newton's third law of motion Visualized
m.youtube.com...

So the chamber fills up with smoke and you still think it’s a vacuum? You can literally see the smoke start moving in the same direction as the rocket showing that the smoke is actually pushing the rocket

Blatantly false argument by you, with a sad attempt to change the subject. Please quote where I posted anything about smoke?


This is how ridiculous your argument is. Are you saying a powerful explosive placed on an asteroid and detonated will not result in hurling pieces of asteroid in to space because of pressure gradient force? How is the detonation hurling pieces of asteroid in to space any different then the controlled detonation from a rocket engine.

Think about it this way. The gas exiting from the rocket is basically a controlled explosion. If the reacting gasses were not in a nozzle, the exit gasses would want to expand in all directions. Is that false. In a rocket, the gas release is forced out in one direction. Is that false. So the gas is required to push against the combustion chamber. Is that false. The expanding gasses by contact and collisions is forced out the nozzle opening. Is that false. So by Newton’s third law, the expanding gasses forced out of the nozzle by contact will result in thrust for the rocket. Is this false. Using Newton’s third law to move the rocket has nothing to to with the atmosphere. Is that false.

Again, Newton’s third law can be expressed without terms of pressure gradient force.

Unless you want to mathematically show how the only deciding factor for Newton’s third law is “ pressure gradient force.“


IF I POSTED ANYTHING FALSE, QUOTE WHAT IS FALSE AND PROVIDE AN ACTUAL CONSTRUCTED ARGUMENT WHY IT IS FALSE.

a reply to: neutronflux

So a chamber filled with smoke is a vacuum? The smoke should be removed immediately from the chamber not allowing the chamber to pressurize.

This thread is still going? If this were true, some group of truthers could prove it with a few thousand dollars worth of equipment and tracking the ISS. Next time NASA claims they adjusted it's orbit with the RCS, they could release the data showing the ISS orbit didn't change and the only thing affecting it are Newton's laws of motion. Problem solved. No one has done this in 60 years of having things in orbit?

originally posted by: NicSign
a reply to: neutronflux

So a chamber filled with smoke is a vacuum? The smoke should be removed immediately from the chamber not allowing the chamber to pressurize.

What are you ranting about now?

How rockets and boosters blast into space

cosmosmagazine.com...

To create the explosion, you need two key elements: a fuel source and an oxidising agent. The fuel stores the chemical energy, released as it burns when ignited. But to help it ignite, an oxidiser such as oxygen, hydrogen peroxide or halogen is needed. These oxidisers effectively steal one or more electrons from the atoms comprising the fuel, a tiny but violent act that triggers an explosion.

In a rocket, the oxidiser and fuel are introduced to each other in a combustion chamber. Their explosive meeting creates huge amounts of high-temperature exhaust gas, which is under immense pressure.

These gases are then forced out of the nozzle at the base of the engine, generating thrust. The result is a perfect example of Newton’s Third Law: for every action, there is an equal and opposite reaction. As the exhaust gases are forced down, the engine and the spacecraft to which it is bolted are forced up. The narrower the nozzle, and the more pressure inside the chamber, the greater the thrust.

Rocket working in space....

Onboard camera view: launch and separation of Sentinel-1A
m.youtube.com...

a reply to: NicSign

More proof your claim rockets don’t work in a vacuum is a blatant lie.

Japanese probe fires rockets to steer into orbit at Venus

spaceflightnow.com...

Five years after missing a shot to enter orbit at Venus, Japan’s Akatsuki spacecraft completed a critical rocket burn late Sunday in a bid to salvage the research mission and become the only space probe operating around Earth’s nearest planetary neighbor.

Four maneuvering thrusters were scheduled to ignite at 2351 GMT (6:51 p.m. EST) Sunday for approximately 20 minutes and 30 seconds to slow down the Akatsuki probe enough for Venus’ gravity to capture it into an elongated, high-altitude orbit.

Japan's Akatsuki Probe Sends First Images of Venus
m.youtube.com...

If rockets don’t work in the vacuum of space, how did Japan's Akatsuki Probe get into obit around Venus?

a reply to: NicSign

More video of rocket working in space....

GoPro Awards: On a Rocket Launch to Space
m.youtube.com...

UP Aerospace

en.m.wikipedia.org...

UP Aerospace SL-10 mission launched on November 6, 2015 from Spaceport America. The SpaceLoft XL suborbital sounding rocket carried four technology experiments for NASA's Flight Opportunities Program to an altitude of approximately 75 miles (120 km). For the first time for UP Aerospace the payload experiments were separated from the rocket for an independent re-entry and were recovered 30 miles downrange after parachuting down individually.[16]

a reply to: NicSign

More of a rocket working in space.

Deorbit burn flash on video at about 1:02:13 for Soyuz capsule reentry.

LIVE Soyuz MS-09 ISS Expedition 57 Deorbit Reentry Landing And Recovery
m.youtube.com...

a reply to: neutronflux

Lol every video is edited or it’s cgi. You still can’t prove that rockets work in space/

originally posted by: NicSign
a reply to: neutronflux

Lol every video is edited or it’s cgi. You still can’t prove that rockets work in space/

Dude. Based on what? To claim someone is lying with no proof is slander.

The videos are references to people using rockets to produce tangible results.

Real people tracked and recovered Soyuz capsules full of real people that made it to and back from the international space station which is now the third brightest object in the night sky.

Why would a research trip to Venus be faked. With real people tracking a real mission returning real data.

Why would project SL-10 be faked. And the experiments on board?

How did the mirrors on the moon used with earth based lasers to measure the distance of the moon get on the moon’s surface?

How did the communication and GPS satellites that revolutionized modern life and are used minute by minute get to space.

Satellite flare, also known as satellite glint, is the visible phenomenon caused by the reflective surfaces of passing satellites (such as antennas, SAR or solar panels), reflecting sunlight toward the Earth below and appearing as a brief, bright "flare".
en.m.wikipedia.org...

The 66 mobile satellite communications satellites in low Earth orbit owned by Iridium all have three reflective panels that occasionally catch the Sun and flare for between five and 20 seconds.

They can be as bright as magnitude -8, which is brighter than Venus, and over the years have become the target of many astrophotographers and astronomers, keen to see how many they can spot.
www.skyatnightmagazine.com...

a reply to: neutronflux

Then where is the proof. You provided a video of a rocket that stop before the rocket even enters space. The rest is just cgi. The cgi is the movie gravity was much better by the way.

NicSign It has been determined you are a bot and not a very useful one.

Good bye

originally posted by: NicSign
a reply to: neutronflux

Then where is the proof. You provided a video of a rocket that stop before the rocket even enters space. The rest is just cgi. The cgi is the movie gravity was much better by the way.

Not the main point of my argument.

The argument is from first had accounts of people traveling to and from the International space station that is visible in Earth’s night sky. The flashes off satellites in orbit that you can observe yourself. Items used in space placed in space by rockets. International space station, mirrors on the moon, satellite phones, GPS satellites, telecommunications satellites, experiments, probes sent to planets, comets, moons, and asteroids, moon mapping missions, weather satellites.....