This is how NASA would respond to an asteroid impacting Earth

originally posted by: NicSign
a reply to: DBCowboy

I have already taken physics. The problem is that I have already proven that there is no equal and opposite reaction due to pressure gradient force. You have not proven that there is. So rockets cannot propel in space.

You have bested me.

I only have degrees in engineering so I humbly bow to your epic knowledge of maths and physics.

Well played Moriarty, well played.

a reply to: LookingAtMars

No the pressure pushes off the air. pressure is like a compressed spring between two blocks (rocket and air). When spring uncompresses It is going to push off both blocks. Pressure in a rocket in space is like a compressed spring on one block. (Rocket and space). when spring uncompressed, it doesn't push anything.

a reply to: NicSign

Build a vacuum chamber (like many others in the past have).

Set up a rocket system inside the chamber to travel it's length (propulsion is up to you, it can be a gas, water, or one of those actual model rocket engines).

Ensure you have a complete vacuum in the chamber.

Launch rocket.

Watch it travel the length of the chamber.....in a vacuum.

Experiments doing this have been done by scientists and students around the world for almost a century now.

Once you have done this: go back to school because you obviously did not pay attention the first time.

originally posted by: NicSign
a reply to: LookingAtMars

No the pressure pushes off the air. pressure is like a compressed spring between two blocks (rocket and air). When spring uncompresses It is going to push off both blocks. Pressure in a rocket in space is like a compressed spring on one block. (Rocket and space). when spring uncompressed, it doesn't push anything.

Um... so you are trying to say that the rocket thrusting into space cannot propel anything because in a vacuum there is nothing to push against.

I see where your thought process stopped... let me help you.

It is pushing against it's own fuel.

Thank me later and I found a link that (might) help you...

You're not a Rocket Scientist

Guess what showing up tomorrow

Facebook

Sure is a lot off big one laterly
Link
Link
Link
Link

a reply to: NicSign

You are not the first person to fail to understand that "doing no work on a vacuum" does not mean "does not work in a vacuum". Your (and use the word 'your' loosely) mathematical proof about how gas expands in a vacuum does not prove that rockets don't work.

Why would you think that when a fast moving, very dense, cloud of exhaust gas hits a stationary, much less dense, pocket of air the air is just going to sit there and do nothing?

All very off topic, why not try posing the question somewhere with some actual rocket scientists resident, like, say 'International Skeptics'?

a reply to: NicSign

*points and laughs*

No.

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: KansasGirl

Yeah. But it's pretty clear the intent is military applications in regard to threats and actions.

You'd think asteroids would have been a good bullet point.

How do you know it's not Russia that sends the asteroids!

originally posted by: NicSign
Rockets don't even work in the vacuum of space. You can't deny the science.

www.youtube.com...

Spo the argument there is that rockets dont work in space and NASA is stealing tax payers money ?

if that tax money is the problem , there are bigger budgets out there than NASA

why dont you start with the military first , it makes NASA's budget look like a meal coupon

originally posted by: KansasGirl

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: KansasGirl

Yeah. But it's pretty clear the intent is military applications in regard to threats and actions.

You'd think asteroids would have been a good bullet point.

How do you know it's not Russia that sends the asteroids!

Because asteroids seem to be hitting mostly Russia these days.

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: ElGoobero

Doesn't really seem so.

The United States Space Force shall be organized, trained, and equipped to meet the following priorities:

(a) Protecting the Nation’s interests in space and the peaceful use of space for all responsible actors, consistent with applicable law, including international law;

(b) Ensuring unfettered use of space for United States national security purposes, the United States economy, and United States persons, partners, and allies;

(c) Deterring aggression and defending the Nation, United States allies, and United States interests from hostile acts in and from space;

(d) Ensuring that needed space capabilities are integrated and available to all United States Combatant Commands;

(e) Projecting military power in, from, and to space in support of our Nation’s interests; and

(f) Developing, maintaining, and improving a community of professionals focused on the national security demands of the space domain.

www.hsdl.org...

"Our Nation's interests" don't include surviving an asteroid I guess...

originally posted by: NicSign
a reply to: LookingAtMars

No the pressure pushes off the air. pressure is like a compressed spring between two blocks (rocket and air). When spring uncompresses It is going to push off both blocks. Pressure in a rocket in space is like a compressed spring on one block. (Rocket and space). when spring uncompressed, it doesn't push anything.

I don't believe you have a degree, or any impressive gpa, etc, in physics. If so, you got ripped off.

I've never been to college. Got a GED because I skipped too much school to graduate on time and I wasnt gonna sit through that hellhole called public schools for another 2 years.


Consider that there is an "atmosphere" inside the canister of propellant. Something solid enough to create thrust. THAT might be what your "spring" is pushing against as it travels out the nozzle... consider liquid gas dynamics. The gas is basically pushing against other gas from my rudimentary understanding.

You could cause movement without even expelling any gas, if you could somehow cause the gas to move around inside the canister/tank. Just like if your sitting in a row boat on a calm pond with no wind, you can move around inside the boat without ever touching the water itself and cause movement.

With enough practice you could shift your weight around in a way that you could direct the motion in a direction you desire. (but...but...nothing was pushing against anything...so that's "impossible" because no gradient forces were acting upon the water!)

And finally, do an experiment.





NASA is lying about stuff, there is no doubt of that anymore.

I might even be willing to entertain that space is not as much of a vacuum as we are told.

But you are chasing a red herring in my humble, unprogrammed, I mean, uneducated, opinion.

I want to point out though, I don't think you are stupid. I don't think you should be made to feel stupid for having this thought. That is all.

originally posted by: NicSign
a reply to: OneBigMonkeyToo

rockets working in space is pseudoscience. Rockets don't give the exhaust momentum, pressure gradient force does.

You seem to be having trouble understanding the science. Your understanding is superficial enough to result in wrong conclusions.


EDIT TO ADD:

originally posted by: NicSign
No the pressure pushes off the air. pressure is like a compressed spring between two blocks (rocket and air). When spring uncompresses It is going to push off both blocks. Pressure in a rocket in space is like a compressed spring on one block. (Rocket and space). when spring uncompressed, it doesn't push anything.

The expanding gasses push in all directions inside a rocket engine. If the system was totally closed, those gasses would push equally on all sides and would cancel each other out. Open one end and gasses will escape out that end, thus potentially taking the system out of pressure equilibrium because the gasses in the open end are no longer pushing on that end.

Newton tells us that if the gasses are escaping out of that one end, then to keep total equilibrium there must be an equal reaction pushing on the opposite (still closed) end of the engine. It is this pressure pushing on the inside closed end that provides the force that propels the rocket.

No atmosphere is required.

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: KansasGirl

Yeah. But it's pretty clear the intent is military applications in regard to threats and actions.

You'd think asteroids would have been a good bullet point.

Yeah we could think of lots of neat little bullet points. But, its already covered under national security so that would be redundant. Anything coming at us; weapon, rock, alien, God, space junk... its already covered under "national interests".


If asteroids were mentioned, people like you would be accusing Trump of fear mongering in order to get funding for another "monument to his glory".

But since they were not mentioned, you subtly imply Trump isnt concerned for our safety. NICE. REEEEEAL NICE...

a reply to: DBCowboy

And then they'll say " Now is the time that we tell the truth, the whole truth so help me ehhh?"

a reply to: DBCowboy

I used to belong to the L5 Society back in the Mid 70's . We Assumed We would be in a Stable Orbit between the Earth and Moon when the SHTF in a Scenario like this . We Ran out of Money for a Continuous Effort in Refining the Technology to be able to See Our Dream Come Alive according to Our Unrealistic Timetable . It's Every Man for Himself now Fellas ...............)

originally posted by: wildespace
Because asteroids seem to be hitting mostly Russia these days.

That statistically makes sense because it's so damned big. More meteors / asteroids probably hit the ocean, but only the military knows how many.

a reply to: 3n19m470

Oh, I'm sure Trump is very concerned about asteroids.

It's just that they don't seem to be under the purview of his Space (space...space) Force (force...force). Which is what someone inquired about. But I'm sure they would be happy to lend one of their space cruisers for the cause, if ordered to do so.

Though, since rockets don't work in space, I'm not sure they could.

Under this proposal, the United States Space Force would be authorized to organize, train, and equip military space forces of the United States to ensure unfettered access to, and freedom to operate in, space, and to provide vital capabilities to joint and coalition forces in peacetime and across the spectrum of conflict.

originally posted by: NicSign
a reply to: DBCowboy

I have already taken physics. The problem is that I have already proven that there is no equal and opposite reaction due to pressure gradient force. You have not proven that there is. So rockets cannot propel in space.

You've proven nothing other than your utter failure to comprehend basic grade 10 physics. First off you're forgetting Newton's second law, basically any object in motion will remain in motion so long as all forces upon it remain the same. Secondly your also forgetting that all rockets are launched from the earth's surface. So by combining the two you begin to realize that your argument just doesnt hold water.

Beyond all that you are also forgetting (and failing to answer) that comets can and do change their course by expelling gas, much the same way satellites do the same with thrusters. By your (flawed) logic that should be impossible. If they can change course in such a manner, then why exactly wont a rocket be able to obtain thrust from a solid fuel engine/ion drive (basically an oversized gas vent/thruster)?

As I said you fail in basic understanding. Either give it up, or crack a book and actually learn something of substance. It is best to have a good understanding of a topic before you dive into the hell that is YouTube. Otherwise you will find yourself being made a fool of when you begin to spout nonsense (like you are now).

Think about this one is a possibility



or
youtu.be...