SpaceX Launches First Rocket from Iconic Florida Pad

cool story bro, what does it matter what my assumptions are?,
show me the scientific testing done in the real world which prove what you're saying happens actually ,
preferably with video footage

I provided all the science and engineering info you needed with that one link earlier in post #35.
Please explain what you do not like from the facts and equations presented by http://www.braeunig.us/space/propuls.htm
Proven science equations (with Newton's Laws of Motion).. check.
Proven engineering equations... check
Proven chemical reaction equations... check
Proven exhaust velocity-momentum-thrust-Impulse equations... check
The equations for reaction in the nozzle...check
Proven values for nozzle design...check
Proven thoat diameter for engine sizing...check
Also has the kinetic energy information in there as well.

Unfortunately there are no comics for this subject :)
 
I provided all the science and engineering info you needed with that one link earlier in post #35.
Please explain what you do not like from the facts and equations presented by http://www.braeunig.us/space/propuls.htm

Unfortunately there are no comics for this subject :)
Comic for subject, XKCD doing what he does, https://xkcd.com/1133/

up_goer_five.png
 
Also, your assumptions matter because we have to have a basis for understanding your obtuseness and how to approach it.

why do you want to understand me? i'm asking you for scientific tests of rockets in a vacuum,
with proof of acceleration
 
Rockets work in space the same way they work in our atmosphere. There just isn't wind resistance.

Do you use GPS? That is proof that rockets work in space.
 
Rockets work in space the same way they work in our atmosphere. There just isn't wind resistance.

Do you use GPS? That is proof that rockets work in space.

Looking at the webpage linked earlier in here it was making me think that a rocket might work even BETTER in space because in atmosphere there is constant atmosphere trying to make it's way into the combustion chamber. In order evacuate the combustion chamber it has to push against the atmosphere trying to get in. In space you would not have that, the thrust ratio should be even higher. I didn't look it up though, just off the cuff thinking.
 
Rockets work in space the same way they work in our atmosphere. There just isn't wind resistance.

Do you use GPS? That is proof that rockets work in space.

I thought GPS was proof Bill Clinton did something useful.


Ba-zing!
 
Looking at the webpage linked earlier in here it was making me think that a rocket might work even BETTER in space because in atmosphere there is constant atmosphere trying to make it's way into the combustion chamber. In order evacuate the combustion chamber it has to push against the atmosphere trying to get in. In space you would not have that, the thrust ratio should be even higher. I didn't look it up though, just off the cuff thinking.

Also the benefit is not having to deal with air pressure in terms of the design of the nozzle and exhaust-gas velocity, one reason for the multiple stages in a rocket due to the change in pressure.
So once in space only need one nozzle-combustion chamber-injector design, and separately I assume much less chance for a rocket to shake itself into critical failure with no atmosphere pressure working against it (especially when at its peak resistance).
Just saying and appreciate you probably thought of this.
Cheers
 
Last edited:
cool story bro, what does it matter what my assumptions are?,
show me the scientific testing done in the real world which prove what you're saying happens actually ,
preferably with video footage

Turn on your TV. They are testing right now.
 
words words words, where is the testing and proof of concept?
The testing and proof is in the equations.....
They are not pie in the sky, do you think Newton's Laws on Motion also needs proof these days?

Hang on!!!
Its all a conspiracy there is no conservation of momentum or kinetic energy!!!!!
All those laws of physics and various equations used in science and by engineers are wrong and fake!!!!
Oh woe and alas, if only buhbufet was there in the past to keep saying "duh where is proof, and I wanna drawing... in crayons!" :)

Maybe you will accept the info from a Dept of Physics and Astronomy: http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/rocket.html
But hey if you want to ignore accepted equations I think you have a problem with the concept of proof.
Oh wait, these and the earlier link are all based from a core equation set.... it must be a conspiracy from the science world!
 
To inject a bit of sanity into the thread.
This is a great video with a bit about life on the International Space Station, incredible how cramped and engineer focused the station is, not very comfortable and the persistent noise.
Anyway well worth watching and one of my favourites transmitted from up there, and due to it being in space can give one a strange sensation when watching these vids for awhile.


Samantha Cristoforetti has also done some fun videos from ISS, as well as Karen Nyberg.

Cheers
 
Last edited:
i like that girl, shes hot, anyways i'll wait if any of you wanna come up with proof of concept
 
what evidence is there that proves rockets work in a vacuum aka "space"?

How rockets work, the equations which guide them, and the optimal nozzle size for the stage of the rocket.




It all comes back to Newton's laws, as others have said.

F = ma
F is force
m is mass (just to be clear, mass does not require gravity in order to exist. Gravity merely gives objects weight because gravity is applying a force to the mass of the object. Weight is the acceleration of the mass toward the source of gravity)
a is acceleration

In this case fluids going through the nozzle are being accelerated at a very high speed. Since the fluid has mass and is being accelerated it's exerting a force on the parent object (the rocket).

Here's a paper from NASA (dated 1971) which has the calculations of engine thrust starting on page 63. https://ntrs.nasa.gov/archive/nasa/casi.ntrs.nasa.gov/19710019929.pdf

This is the scientific proof you are looking for. The scientific method has been followed with hypothesis (the paper and past knowledge with Newton/Einstein/many others), testing (see rocket launches/satellites), and verification (yep there are satellites up there! (get out a telescope for yourself))
 
Time to turn one of those around. That will be another big first.

Already on the books; the SES10 mission will fly a reused F9 toward the end of March, according to the current schedule. Big first, indeed. (y)
 
fucking rockets, how do they work

everyone knows if you run out of fuel you go outside the ship and push with your jetpack
 
i'll wait if any of you wanna come up with proof of concept
Let me guess. This tard also uses words like "racist" and "sexist" and "nazi". Just a hunch, ya know, due to it's inability to accept reality as it appears in front its very own eyes.

Make outrageous claim -> Expect others to prove its false.

Yup. Retardation is real.

Now show me the scientific proof in a vacuum on earth, that you're not retarded!
 
i like that girl, shes hot, anyways i'll wait if any of you wanna come up with proof of concept

How do you know 1+1=2...
What scientific proof did you ask for?
I assume you do not pay for anything or use any products or tools that rely upon numbers because obviously without something as simple as 1+1=2 being 'scientifically' proved to you it must all be wrong :confused:
 
where did you do those scientific tests in a kindergarden?

yes very scientific, how much did we pay nasa to do that?


There's no good reason for NASA to get involved, when above little experiment will do.

It experimentally proves that explosive decompression in space induces a movement of the containment vessel.

Now, if your vague question lacking logical follow-up was meant to address some other imagined lacuna, feel free to marry precision to your inquiry.

Otherwise, may I suggest the following.


QUOTE="buhbuhfet, post: 1042827429, member: 289981"]i like that girl, shes hot, anyways i'll wait if any of you wanna come up with proof of concept[/QUOTE]

Try to shoot yourself on the moon (because all you need to do is call a bullet "rocket", aim exquisitely well, and wait while the propellant gases do their thing).

http://www.livescience.com/18588-shoot-gun-space.html
 
Last edited by a moderator:
How do you know 1+1=2...
What scientific proof did you ask for?
I assume you do not pay for anything or use any products or tools that rely upon numbers because obviously without something as simple as 1+1=2 being 'scientifically' proved to you it must all be wrong :confused:

buhbuhfet .
Just to help you out as it seems you need it.
The hint would be Principia Mathematica and the proof is incredibly complex with axiom/equations, but that is just like what we have presented for rockets/Newton's Laws Motion/thrust/etc that you feel is not proof.

Therefore you do not accept 1+1=2....
Shame that kids know more and accept 1+1=2 but you do not.
If your going to troll, might as well do it in style like this :)

Sure someone will mention Kurt Godel but I think buhbuhfet is too lazy to even try and understand it all going by his lack of effort when posting.
Cheers
 
Last edited:
Yeah, added to my ignore list after his second post in this thread. From the responses you're still be trolled. Just stop.
 
Earth is flat
Lizardmen are in control
We never landed on the moon
Vaccines kill people
Big pharma
Chemtrails
Uhhh I'm sure I'm missing some
 

Attachments

  • IMG_2554.JPG
    IMG_2554.JPG
    105.7 KB · Views: 26
Newton's third law buddy
ok buddy, i have a few laws for you too,
thou shalt not bear false witness, and thou shalt not steal

Earth is flat
where does the water curve?
Trimlock said:
Lizardmen are in control,
lizards, demons, what's the difference?
Trimlock said:
We never landed on the moon ,
true
Trimlock said:
Vaccines kill people,
true
Trimlock said:
Big pharma,
yeah it's big
Trimlock said:
Chemtrails,
go outside and look up
Trimlock said:
Uhhh I'm sure I'm missing some
you forgot about jesuits and the freemasons
 
why do you want to understand me? i'm asking you for scientific tests of rockets in a vacuum,
with proof of acceleration

A lot of people are being rude to you, but I'm curious. What do you think happens to a rocket in space?
 
what is space? where does the atmosphere end and space begin?
how is it possible to have an atmosphere with a vacuum all around it?
 
Back
Top