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

Here is a rocket launch all the way to space...
www.youtube.com...

Here is an experiment about exactly thrust inside a vacuum chamber

www.youtube.com...

a reply to: NicSign

Stand in a boat, with a house brick in your hand, then throw the brick out the back with all the force you can muster.

Does it move the boat because the brick is pushing against something?

If the brick were pushing against the atmosphere, how does that force reach back across the increasing distance and move the boat?

When a rocket fires in space, the fuel which has mass, is being thrown away behind the rocket. Just like the brick is thrown away. They refer to the 'thrown away' mass as reaction mass.

You can throw away a lot of mass slowly and it will propel the rocket in the opposite direction with a force proportional to the mass and the speed it is thrown with.

If you throw a smaller mass but with a faster speed, the force it generates can look the same as a larger mass at slower speed.

Rockets eject the mass of the spent fuel, at as high a speed as is possible. They also don't do it in a single throw, but in a continuous stream. In this way, a rocket can build up significant speed over time.

a reply to: NoCorruptionAllowed


No not you, sorry about that. It was towards NicSign.

You can PM me about my syntax if you find fault in it's structure. As for me and rocket science, well that's just a whole other topic.

a reply to: NicSign

So then , the Law of Thermodynamics does not Apply outside of Earth's Atmosphere ? ....Hmm...

a reply to: NicSign

There's a really simple way to make sense of it.

When you think about a rocket in space, in your mind.. separate the explosion in the engine (made from ignited fuel and oxygen) from the rocket itself and look at them as 2 separate things.

Here's a text graphic example of what I mean..

originally posted by: Guyfriday
a reply to: NoCorruptionAllowed


No not you, sorry about that. It was towards NicSign.

You can PM me about my syntax if you find fault in it's structure. As for me and rocket science, well that's just a whole other topic.

Yep sry, I thought I was replying to the OP and didn't check after posting.
Everything I was discussing in that post was meant for the OP not you.
Fixed now, all good

Fig Newton's Law(s)...

1. Every object in a state of uniform tends to remain stationary unless an external force is applied to its man sack.

2. The relationship between an object's mass m, its acceleration w (warp), and the applied force I (infinity) is I = m/zero. Acceleration and infinity are vectors (as indicated by their symbols being displayed in slant bold font); in this law the direction of the force vector is the same as the direction of the infinity vector...unless some other crazy S# happens which nobody can explain. Oh, and infinity is really big.

3. For every action there is an equal...well, whatever.

4. The velocity of a Fig Newton is inversely proportional to the amount of mass in a person's stomach, and directly proportional to the number of bong hits.

There's a bunch of other ones...but this pretty much covers Fig Fysics.

a reply to: chr0naut

Good analogy chr0. Glad to see it.

originally posted by: Flyingclaydisk
Fig Newton's Law(s)...

1. Every object in a state of uniform tends to remain stationary unless an external force is applied to its man sack.

2. The relationship between an object's mass m, its acceleration w (warp), and the applied force I (infinity) is I = m/zero. Acceleration and infinity are vectors (as indicated by their symbols being displayed in slant bold font); in this law the direction of the force vector is the same as the direction of the infinity vector...unless some other crazy S# happens which nobody can explain. Oh, and infinity is really big.

3. For every action there is an equal...well, whatever.

4. The velocity of a Fig Newton is inversely proportional to the amount of mass in a person's stomach, and directly proportional to the number of bong hits.

There's a bunch of other ones...but this pretty much covers Fig Fysics.

Remember that figs are like hops and you can make beer with hops.

In this way it becomes clear that alcohol, a constituent of fermented hops (which are like figs), which is flammable and could even be used as rocket fuel, is contributory to farts, which can propel people in space to impact with bulkheads.

Thus confirming the science of rocketry.

Ummmm, Newton's third law sums this argument up nicely.

The exhaust from a rocket is propelled out of the ignition chamber with great force. With no atmospheric resistance, as in space, Newton's third law works incredibly well in pushing rockets at great speeds. However much force is directed out the back of the rocket is how much force you have pushing the rocket forward.

A rocket does not need to push against something to generate thrust. The rapid expansion of the fuel exiting the ignition chamber through a small orifice or venturi generates more than enough thrust to push a rocket through space.

Another vacuum chamber with rocket on youtube

a reply to: Vroomfondel

The OP thinks that pressure gradient force is the only force involved. If that were true he would be correct. However, the OP disregards the result of pressure gradient force, which is that a gas moves from a region of higher pressure to a region of lower pressure. The amount of force (and acceleration of the gas) can be derived from Newton's Second Law.

The OP disregards the fact that the acceleration and velocity of the gas (in the throat of the rocket engine) brings Newton's Third Law into play. Separate and distinct from pressure gradient force.

The OP will now repeat that a rocket cannot function in space.

Pretty much all knowledge I have concerning space travel has come from basic physics and playing Kerbal Space Program. Why is this at least the 2nd of these threads I have seen here in the last week? Not sure if OP authored the other thread or not, but they should really look at the mounds of evidence there before starting this one and rehashing all this info.

a reply to: NicSignWell then how do retro-rockets work to bring down stuff from orbit in outer space?

Here's how this thread will go:

1. The OP makes a claim based on some uneducated ill-informed YouTube video.
2. OP demands everyone provides proof he is wrong.
3. Everyone provides proof he is wrong.
4. OP dismisses proof as wrong and all evidence provided is fake.
5. OP insists everyone watches the video again. Repeat to fade.

The OP is just parroting the video and has no understanding of the subject. He is not interested in the answers to his question and he will not answer anyone else's without copying and pasting stock answers straight from his favourite YouTube video.

Everything he demands has been repeatedly provided (and not just in this forum) but it's just handwaved away without any attempt explain his line of argument or support his idea with the kind of proof he insists everyone else has to provide. Every video must be fake, every scientist must be lying, everyone is wrong except him.

It's a total waste of time.

a reply to: NicSign
Thog make FIRE! Thog go FORWARD!
...Thog no like electromagnetic gavitics.
Cuz Thog no understand.


//behind closed doors//
Thog actually balling cuz Thog take payoff from Deep State to create false public front of arcane backwards transportation technology to subvert masses' perception of space exploration development started in 1930's.
Thog good boy.....
Thog like money.

...Thog hate self....

Maybe a bit redundant considering all the preceding good evidence that soundly contradicts the claims but interesting nonetheless:

a reply to: NicSign

I may be wrong as I've done no physics since I left school in 1995, despite being good at it but surely it's not that there's nothing for a rocket thruster to push against in the vacuum of space, it's that there's no resistance to the rocket itself in the vacuum of space so rockets actually work more efficiantly there than in our atmosphere...

a reply to: djz3ro

Yes, rocket engines always have a higher ISP(specific Impulse) in space(vacuum) versus at sea level. Thanks KSP. lol