Rockets do not work in the vacuum of space. You will believe anything "expert" scientists say.

a reply to: Beestie

Nothing is being discharged. Two astronauts playing catch is a different matter. They'll move away from each other.

OK i will put it another way. A astronaut in space has a big bag of marbles. He discharges from his big bag one marble at a time. Using your understanding should this not cause him to move.?

a reply to: purplemer

Because when one imparts momentum to a mass there is equal momentum applied in the opposite direction.

Smart fellow, Newton.
www.education.com...

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: purplemer

We understand what the OP is saying. The OP is mistaken. A rocket does not need to thrust "against" anything. A rocket operates by pushing something in one direction. That creates thrust in the opposite direction.

Thank you for your reply. If that is the case. Could an astronaut gain inertia simply by dropping marbles out of a bag.

In order to push something in one direction you need something to push against dont you?

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: purplemer

Because when one imparts momentum to a mass there is equal momentum applied in the opposite direction.

Smart fellow, Newton.
www.education.com...

Smart in an outdated mechanical universe kind of way maybe. We all know the theory but that in itself is not answering the question.

What causes the inertia. What is the rocket pushing against.

a reply to: purplemer

What causes the inertia.

I don't know. But like gravity, it is a property of matter.
Both are really inconvenient at times but, all things considered, I would rather they exist than not.

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: purplemer

What causes the inertia.

I don't know. But like gravity, it is a property of matter.
Both are really inconvenient at times but, all things considered, I would rather they exist than not.

If you are going to quote me. Do so in full. This is what i said

What causes the inertia. What is the rocket pushing against.

Dont be obtuse I was asking what the rocket was pushing against to cause the inertia. Its surprising to me but at this point it looks to me like you do not actually know. You should have just said that a lot earlier on. There is nothing wrong with not knowing. I dont know myself that why I was asking the questions.


So in a nutshell you are saying you do not know what causes the rocket to move through a void when thrust is applied.

Heck you should have given the OP a flag instead of taking the #

a reply to: purplemer

Dont be obtuse I was asking what the rocket was pushing against to cause the inertia.

A rocket does not cause inertia. Inertia is a property of matter. I said I don't know what causes inertia.

So in a nutshell you are saying you do not know what causes the rocket to move through a void when thrust is applied.

No more than I know what causes my shoe to fall to the floor when I drop it, but I know it does. Just as I know it's nonsense to claim that rockets don't work in a vacuum, because they do. I also know that, like gravity, the effect is quantifiable and predictable. It is real.

originally posted by: purplemer
a reply to: Beestie

Nothing is being discharged. Two astronauts playing catch is a different matter. They'll move away from each other.

OK i will put it another way. A astronaut in space has a big bag of marbles. He discharges from his big bag one marble at a time. Using your understanding should this not cause him to move.?

Yes. He'll move a little faster with every discharge.

a reply to: Phage

Just as I know it's nonsense to claim that rockets don't work in a vacuum, because they do. I also know that, like gravity, the effect is quantifiable and predictable. It is real.

So you know its real but cannot explain why it works. As I said you should have been less obtuse with the OP. The point is valid.

Your explanation is they work because I know they work.

And on inertia... Its a result not a cause.

a reply to: purplemer

Your explanation is they work because I know they work.

I also know how they work (if not why). The OP does not.

To explain inertia beter. Energy doesn't get used up it gets converted into a different form. Kinetic energy gets converted into potential energy. That potential energy will be converted back to kinetic energy when that moving object hits something.

Double post

originally posted by: purplemer

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: purplemer

We understand what the OP is saying. The OP is mistaken. A rocket does not need to thrust "against" anything. A rocket operates by pushing something in one direction. That creates thrust in the opposite direction.

Thank you for your reply. If that is the case. Could an astronaut gain inertia simply by dropping marbles out of a bag.

In order to push something in one direction you need something to push against dont you?

Come on. It isn't that hard. Dropping it to where? Both the man and marble is in orbit. He needs to expel it at a velocity. When he throws it the marble it pushes against his hand. It's not rocket science....oh wait....it is.

originally posted by: NicSign
a reply to: fleabit

Radio signal and underground cables.

Bahhhh hahahahaha hahaha hahaha hahaha hahahahahaha

This guy believes a FOR PROFIT company spends tens of millions of dollars shipping it's customers FAKE dishes just to keep the big lie going.....

OMG WTF BBQ.

So.... all my friends in the military doing satcom work have fake jobs, making very good money doing fake things, using fake equipment, with fake parabolic dishes built and programmed by a fake industry with fake coding and fake everything and it's all a big hoax and not a single person along any step of this path caught on...

Cheech n Chong ain't got $#!@ on you my man!!!

question for anyone wo believes that :

" satalites // sat-comm technology = fake "

how do small consumer // prosumer handhelds [ iridium phone handset , garmin inreach " SPOT " various PLB // EPLBIR devices . that do not have directional prabolic antenea work [ specifically - how do they work in areas where conventional UFH , VHF , cellular telephony etc fails ] ?????????

originally posted by: 8675309jenny

originally posted by: NicSign
a reply to: fleabit

Radio signal and underground cables.

Bahhhh hahahahaha hahaha hahaha hahaha hahahahahaha

This guy believes a FOR PROFIT company spends tens of millions of dollars shipping it's customers FAKE dishes just to keep the big lie going.....

OMG WTF BBQ.

So.... all my friends in the military doing satcom work have fake jobs, making very good money doing fake things, using fake equipment, with fake parabolic dishes built and programmed by a fake industry with fake coding and fake everything and it's all a big hoax and not a single person along any step of this path caught on...

Cheech n Chong ain't got $#!@ on you my man!!!

Hahaha yes. Crazy what these flat earth folk believe. I always wondered why socialism is making a comeback. Now we know why.

Hey Nicsign, does this level of stupidity come naturally to you or do you have to work at it? Serious question, because it has been shown multiple times, by multiple posters, in multiple threads now, that you are wrong. The fact that you cant, or maybe just wont, accept those answers is just sad.

On a side note, how about you lay out the equations you used to come to your conclusion (in long form please, not just your normal summarized form). Maybe that way someone can correct your flawed math and help you actually learn something, rather than just spouting nonsense you heard from YouTube.

a reply to: NicSign

Lol. It's the only response this nonsense deserves.

a reply to: Beestie

Come on. It isn't that hard. Dropping it to where? Both the man and marble is in orbit. He needs to expel it at a velocity. When he throws it the marble it pushes against his hand. It's not rocket science....oh wait....it is

Do people not think.
What are you pushing against. Your in a void in space and push a marble against your hand. The mable will offer zero resistance in void. So where does the momentum come from. Your are pushing against an empty foundation.