Topic: Flat Earth - page 624. (Read 1095196 times)

If 14.7 psi isn't tremendous pressure then perhaps you'd like to explain why when BADecker sticks his head in a vacuum chamber at 0 psi it explodes with considerable force? As for the atmosphere not reacting to the expanding gasses exiting the rocket nozzle, I'm sorry but you're either a fool or a shill to state this.

Yes but if you push against the internals of the rockets you are pushing it back. So its like 0 sum force. Thats why I used the argument of unability of elevating yourself by the belt - you keep making 0 sum force even if you use force. Just explain me where on which direction and what is the cause of the pressure wave. It should not be that hard to do.

Until you understand that the propulsion system of a rocket works due to the gases pushing against the internals of the rocket engine and not the atmosphere itself, you're never going to understand why they work (better) in a vacuum.

Should be able to go around in a full circle in any direction.. north, south, east, or west.
How do flat earth'ers explain their way out of that one ?

The explanation earlier seems to potentially work in only west/east.  

At sea-level atmospheric pressure is a mere 14.7 psi - not really the definition of "tremendous pressure" is it. Nor does the atmosphere greatly restrict the flow of expanding gases, just take a look at exhaust systems in cars and see how well a naturally aspirated engine runs without an exhaust.

So a force affecting a gas does not affect other bodies so why bother with explaining gas? There need to be some connection and the only connection there could be is pressure.


Everybody is making assumptions or using someone elses assumptions. No sorry brainless people dont make assumptions, but yeah I discluded those.

BRAIN works on assumptions.

Experiments are repeated. On Earth. Well. Yeah they are and you just "assume" its the same in supposed vacuum.  Hence the space is vacuum because noone does experiments if a space is vacuum. Got it?

We are not talking about if a rocket works. THEY DO. We are talking about space being a vacuum or not. Got it? And that thing is just assumed not testen, proven peer reviewed or anything. This issue is just ignored.


You have not explained ANYTHING. You have just gave me some stupid article ignoring a thermodynamics - the only thing worth mentioning in the rockets, and you have told me im wrong in assuming something and didnt explain why.

I'm not making any assumptions, I'm using physics that has been tried, tested, proven, peer reviewed and is repeatable if you chose to perform the experiments yourself.

You are correct that the gases produced through the burning of the fuel are not part of the rocket itself, no-where have I said that they are.


Don't get caught up on someones credentials. Just because someone doesn't have a recognised certificate in something doesn't mean that they don't understand how it works. There are plenty of people who have knowledge without certificates, as there are plenty who have certificates without knowledge.

You've mentioned lifting yourself up by the belt, as you're aware, you can't do this and no-one here is even suggesting that you can.

I really don't know how else to explain the physics to you, other than to say keep researching. From your comments it shows that you have some understanding of the physics involved but you are unable to grasp some of the other basic concepts.

And you lick it, making your tongue stuck there, so you could never tell humanity about it.

The world is a motionless flat plane with magnetic north at the center, if you fly east or west via the compass you will eventually travel in a circle.

The atmosphere is under tremendous pressure and greatly restricts the flow of expanding gasses from the rocket nozzle. The pressure caused by the flow of expanding gasses compresses the atmosphere and it's this force between the rocket engine and atmosphere that causes thrust.

Good question.. i would like to see the Flat Earth'ers explain that one LOL 

No its you who make the wrong assumptions. You keep on talking about external gas to the engines like if its a one body within the rocket. Those are not. Even when gases are interior to the engine structure they are still external bodies per se. Gases around you may move very fast they dont affect you unless you compress them against you. Then and only then you might talk about gases affecting another bodies by a compression.

And yes it might seem they are part of rocket becuase they are inside the engine, but they are not a part of the rocket neither any objects with different density is not a part of another body unless you compress them against that body.


Engineers are not scientists. To be an engineer all you have to have is a master degree. To be a scientist you need phd. Someone else gives them assumptions and they build stuff based on that assumptions. Difference between a rockets works in vaccum and there is no vacuum in space is completly and utterly irrelevant for them.

I dont want to assume that they dont understand that you cant lift yourself by the belt. Maybe 4 years in college to be an engineer is to little time to understand that you cant but.... What can I say. Im not physicist maybe they figured out the way how to lift yourself up.

If something works inside a physical body it does not mean that it can move the body in any direction without the external force. If you create forces (newtons) inside the physical body the forces even themselfs (as in the law of thermodynamics) out in every direction if not acted upon by external forces. That is like elementary school physics.


So? Does that makes theory of relativity valid at that kind of speeds? No. Its still a normal physics. Its just makes pressure higher IF A PRESSURE IS BUILT. IF is very important here.

Higher molecules speed makes it possible to use slower moving molecules as if they are different density objects to create a pressure but you need both of them.


Thats a BS. Gas is a gas. Freshly exploded gas with unfreshly exploded gas what does that even mean? Either something has same or different density or speed of particles or is soon to be the same fluid. How do you want to divide the gas? By what measures?

Internal combustion engines have burns as slow as 3 one-thousandths of a second. Controlled detonations in rocket engines can reach an excess of 1 fifty thousandth of a second.

So, what do freshly exploding gasses in a rocket engine push against since there are no pistons? Two things. The rocket engine, and the previously exploded gasses that haven't made it out of the engine yet.

It's funny that you mention compression, as it's the compression of the gases released from the burning mixture that push in all directions causing the pressure within the engine and thus the thrust. While a small amount of compression would occur between the escaping gases and the atmosphere there is nothing restricting the flow of gases outside the rocket so it's negligible.

I've fixed a number of four stroke engines over the years, so I'm quite familiar with the internal combustion engine, wrenches and screwdrivers. How about you?

I don't read everything but how can you explain that we can trip around the world if the earth is flat?

Ah yes, that would explain the odorous slug trail you leave behind you.

The outside pressure you say "works against the thrust of the engine by slowing down the escaping gases" creates what's called "compression". Do you know anything at all about engines? How about the wrench and the screwdriver?





Bonus meme:

†

The assumption that you keep making which is wrong is that pressure in the engine pushes against the outside pressure (atmosphere) to produce thrust, it doesn't. The outside pressure actually works against the thrust of the engine by slowing down the escaping gases. A good way to get your head around this is to think about what would happen if you stopped the gases from escaping the engine by blocking off the exhaust exit. If you did this the pressure would be equalized in all directions and no propulsion could occur.


The engineers study physics as part of their education process. Engineers generally specialise in particular fields, so you would have many engineers working together each contributing in their own areas.


Not trying to cheat or confuse you at all. The reason they don't analyse the mentioned fields is that while they would both affect the amount of thrust being produced, they don't change the principals behind how the engine produces thrust. Think of it this way, regardless of how the fuel flows into the engine and how much expansion occurs when the fuel is burned, pressure is still created that pushes against the inside walls of the engine and this fact is the key to understanding how they work.

Sorry kitten, I forgot that it's all cotton candy and rainbows that you girls pinch out of your shit sockets.

 

See also:
https://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=space+is+fake+nasa+lies