Moon Landings

[Renton 21393]

@wolfy

 

Just a lowly NHS scientist actually, but we're all in on it. Expect a call shortly from the men in black btw. You wouldn't mind sharing your address though because contrary to popular belief we can't trace it through the Internet because the Internet doesn't really exist.

Edited September 16, 2012 by Renton

[wolfy 12]

Why is it impossible to leave Earth? You've given no reason for us to be forever Earthbound. Give us one now, a reason. Not a hunch, not a belief, nothing less than a reason. Otherwise concede that it's fatuous

I can give you a number of reasons...none of which you will accept but there you go.

 

First of all, putting a man made craft through the atmosphere into space is impossible with what we have at the minute but even if we did have the means, the speed needed would tear any craft apart or burn it up.

 

Now then...even getting into space, your rockets do not work in a vacuum and we have been through this. Plus all your components would burn out...plus your life support systems would be rendered useless and you would die.

Not to mention the micrometeorites zooming at the craft at thousands of miles an hour, rendering the astronots and the ship as a holey target board.

 

The radiation from the sun would fry anything up there as well, as there is no shielding to stop it.

[wolfy 12]

@wolfy

 

Just a lowly NHS scientist actually, but we're all in on it. Expect a call shortly from the men in black btw. You wouldn't mind sharing your address though because contrary to popular belief we can't trace it through the Internet because the Internet doesn't really exist.

Sorry mate, I was in the middle of a big fart there. Anyway, I actually enjoyed the film , men in black, it was a canny film.

 

Oh and there's no way I'm sending you pictures of me in address you saucy git.

[The Fish 10779]

I can give you a number of reasons...none of which you will accept but there you go.

 

First of all, putting a man made craft through the atmosphere into space is impossible with what we have at the minute but even if we did have the means, the speed needed would tear any craft apart or burn it up.

 

Now then...even getting into space, your rockets do not work in a vacuum and we have been through this. Plus all your components would burn out...plus your life support systems would be rendered useless and you would die.

Not to mention the micrometeorites zooming at the craft at thousands of miles an hour, rendering the astronots and the ship as a holey target board.

 

The radiation from the sun would fry anything up there as well, as there is no shielding to stop it.

 

Well, rockets do work in a vacuum. Newton's 3rd law proves this, if you don't understand Newton's 3rd law you shouldn't engage in theorising about rockets working in a vacuum.

First off, Speed is irrelevant. Secondly, what speed would objects have to travel to "tear apart" or "Burn up"?

We've been through how heat radiates into the vacuum of space, and how satellites have temperature management systems on board, so I'll move past that.

 

I think you just don't understand the vacuum of space, the concept of gravity and, well, pretty much anything scientific, which would be fine if you weren't arguing against it.

[wolfy 12]

Well, rockets do work in a vacuum. Newton's 3rd law proves this, if you don't understand Newton's 3rd law you shouldn't engage in theorising about rockets working in a vacuum.

First off, Speed is irrelevant. Secondly, what speed would objects have to travel to "tear apart" or "Burn up"?

We've been through how heat radiates into the vacuum of space, and how satellites have temperature management systems on board, so I'll move past that.

 

I think you just don't understand the vacuum of space, the concept of gravity and, well, pretty much anything scientific, which would be fine if you weren't arguing against it.

It's you that doesn't grasp it Fish.

[The Fish 10779]

It's you that doesn't grasp it Fish.

It very clearly isn't

 

There are two possibilities

1. You are on the wind up and the positions you've taken are false
   
2. You don't understand the physics you refute
   

Those are your choices.

 

If it's 1, you've not wound me up and you've just entertained me for a few days and if it's 2 then you're a fool.

[wolfy 12]

It very clearly isn't

 

There are two possibilities

1. You are on the wind up and the positions you've taken are false
    
   
2. You don't understand the physics you refute
   

Those are your choices.

 

If it's 1, you've not wound me up and you've just entertained me for a few days and if it's 2 then you're a fool.

I'm on no wind up.

 

Newtons 3rd law works in an atmosphere but it does not work in a vacuum, so that means your rocket is useless in space.

[The Fish 10779]

I'm on no wind up.

 

Newtons 3rd law works in an atmosphere but it does not work in a vacuum, so that means your rocket is useless in space.

Newton's 3rd law does work in a vacuum. It's a statement that for every action there is an equal and opposite reaction. It isn't reliant on pushing against air or anything else? Why don't you understand this?

 

Parky's explained it to you and here's someone else asking the same question as you are and receiving the same answer

http://www.straightdope.com/columns/read/1846/how-do-rockets-work-in-the-vacuum-of-space

 

Dear Straight Dope:

My understanding of space is that it is a vacuum, i.e., devoid of pretty much all matter, just empty space. Also from my amazingly limited knowledge of physics I understand that in order for a force to create movement it must act upon something. So if a spacecraft fires its rockets into space, a vacuum, what is this force is acting upon? If there is nothing there, what are the rockets pushing against to cause the ship to move? Just something I was thinking about because I have way too much free time, your infinite wisdom would be much appreciated.

— Coulter, UCLA

Don't take this personally, Coulter, but you're no rocket scientist.

You're also not the first person who has failed to achieve Zen with Newton's Third Law. Back in the 1920's when Robert Goddard was fathering rocketry, a New York Times editorial dissed him thusly: "That Professor Goddard with his 'chair' in Clark College and the countenancing of the Smithsonian Institution does not know the relation of action to reaction, and of the need to have something better than a vacuum against which to react--to say that would be absurd. Of course, he only seems to lack the knowledge ladled out daily in high schools." About what you'd expect from a daily newspaper.

The truth is that the rocket does have something to push against: namely, its own fuel. Let's illustrate with an example you kids can try at home. First, you need to get yourself into some sort of frictionless situation. Wearing ice skates on a slippery ice rink would be good, or maybe your office has a chair that rolls really well on a hard surface. Next, you'll need a medicine ball. You are the rocket and the medicine ball is your fuel. Toss the medicine ball. You'll notice that as you shove the medicine ball forwards, you yourself lurch backwards. Ta-da, the miracle of physics! (If you think this is because the medicine ball pushed on the air, then try the experiment without the medicine ball--just push on the air with your hands, see how far you lurch backwards.)

Newton's Third Law is usually expressed as, "For every action there is an equal and opposite reaction," and you can also think of it as "Forces always come in pairs." While you are pushing on the medicine ball, Newton's Third Law says that the medicine ball is also pushing on you. Thus, you are accelerated by the force acting (backward) on you by the medicine ball. Never mind that it was you who decided to start the pushing in the first place; you can't push on the ball without having the ball push back. Forces always come in pairs.

Of course, rockets work on more sophisticated principles than just tossing fuel out the back. First, the fuel is burned and its hot exhaust gases are expelled at very high velocity (if you toss the medicine ball faster, your body experiences greater backward force). And the rocket's exhaust nozzle has a narrowing so as to squirt the exhaust gasses out even faster, like putting your thumb over the end of a garden hose. Exhaust from chemical propulsion (i.e., fuel-burning propulsion) is typically expelled at 2 km/s (= 4500 mph), and your average rocket mass at launch is 80-85% propellant (fuel + oxidizer), most of which eventually gets squirted out.

Thus for example a Delta II rocket can send a 1800 kg payload into geosynchronous orbit, using about 200,000 kg of propellant. The total rocket at launch would have a mass of about 232,000 kg. That's a lot of fuel! This is because 2 km/s (= 4500 mph) is considered "low" speed in Rocket World, so you have to achieve thrust by squirting lots of mass. If you could squirt something even faster out the back of the rocket, you could get more thrust with less fuel, and therefore send heavier payloads.

This is where electric propulsion succeeds. Electrostatic propulsion, also called ion propulsion, uses what amounts to a small particle accelerator to shove fuel particles out the back of a rocket, providing exhaust velocities of 100 km/s (=220,000 mph). NASA's advanced technology test vehicle, Deep Space 1, has been successfully using ion propulsion since its launch in October 1998. It is currently 333 million km from earth, hurtling towards a rendezvous with Comet Borrelly in September 2001. There has also been some work done with electromagnetic propulsion, also called plasma propulsion, where plasma ions' interaction with a magnetic field accelerates them out the back of the rocket. And then there is magnetoplasmadynamic propulsion, where an accelerating force is applied directly to a neutral plasma.

So you can see that rocket science isn't really all that difficult. The question you should be asking is: How does a dilithium-powered anti-matter warp drive work? I have no clue, but I'm sure there are plenty of geeks on the message boards who would be willing to explain it. In Klingon.

— Karen

 

Hope that helps you understand that Newton's 3rd law does, in fact, work in a vacuum.

[The Fish 10779]

[wolfy 12]

Fish, that answer is bullshit, it's a fabrication of the truth.

Bloody fuel pushing against the rocket....What utter bollocks man.

 

Rocket fuel burns...that's all it does, it just burns.

 

A rocket works on Earth because it burns it's fuel against the atmosphere and it's this exhaust that propels it forward.

In space, there is nothing for the fuel to push against when it's getting exhausted because it simply vanishes into the void of space.

 

Newtons law is bullshit in space.

You simply don't understand it Fish.

[wolfy 12]

And what's this supposed to prove?

[The Fish 10779]

Fish, that answer is bullshit, it's a fabrication of the truth.

Bloody fuel pushing against the rocket....What utter bollocks man.

 

Rocket fuel burns...that's all it does, it just burns.

 

A rocket works on Earth because it burns it's fuel against the atmosphere and it's this exhaust that propels it forward.

In space, there is nothing for the fuel to push against when it's getting exhausted because it simply vanishes into the void of space.

 

Newtons law is bullshit in space.

You simply don't understand it Fish.

Hang on, I don't understand Newton's 3rd Law? You're the one insisting that Newton's 3rd Law requires something to push against, proving you don't understand Newton's 3rd Law. If burning were all that was required to create motion, everyone sparking up a match would have their hands pushed down away from the flame. If air were required the video (and countless other videos showing the same sort of thing) wouldn't be possible. You just don't have a clue about physics.

 

But I guess this is a clever hoax too. Someone has been monitoring this site and guessed I'd go looking for evidence of Newton's 3rd law working in a vacuum and quickly knocked up a youtube video to help me out. Your mind is closed tighter than a Scotsman's wallet.

[wolfy 12]

Hang on, I don't understand Newton's 3rd Law? You're the one insisting that Newton's 3rd Law requires something to push against, proving you don't understand Newton's 3rd Law. If burning were all that was required to create motion, everyone sparking up a match would have their hands pushed down away from the flame. If air were required the video (and countless other videos showing the same sort of thing) wouldn't be possible. You just don't have a clue about physics.

 

But I guess this is a clever hoax too. Someone has been monitoring this site and guessed I'd go looking for evidence of Newton's 3rd law working in a vacuum and quickly knocked up a youtube video to help me out. Your mind is closed tighter than a Scotsman's wallet.

A match hahaha.

Fish, you haven't a clue honestly.

 

On Earth Newtons law works fine...in space it's rendered bullshit. You have been sold a dummy and accepted it as gospel that's all. It's easy to do mind you because it can be baffling to people, yet logic should eventually tell you that a rocket will not work in the vacuum of space.

 

I'll try and explain this to you as best I can.

 

If a rocket was in space...now lets imagine space to have a vacuum that's just a tad smaller than what fuel the rocket has to burn. The rocket fires up and goes nowhere, because the vacuum swallows up the fuel as fast as it comes out until that vacuum is filled. Now in this smaller space, the rocket still has a little bit of fuel left after filling the void......it is then that the rocket would propel forward.

 

Unfortunately for the rocket..space is frigging huge, so the rocket will expend all of it's fuel into the massive void of the vacuum of space and space will swallow up all it's fuel until the fuel is spent and say, thank you very much Mr rocket...you remain where you are.

 

Simple as that.

[The Fish 10779]

A match hahaha.

Fish, you haven't a clue honestly.

 

On Earth Newtons law works fine...in space it's rendered bullshit. You have been sold a dummy and accepted it as gospel that's all. It's easy to do mind you because it can be baffling to people, yet logic should eventually tell you that a rocket will not work in the vacuum of space.

 

I'll try and explain this to you as best I can.

 

If a rocket was in space...now lets imagine space to have a vacuum that's just a tad smaller than what fuel the rocket has to burn. The rocket fires up and goes nowhere, because the vacuum swallows up the fuel as fast as it comes out until that vacuum is filled. Now in this smaller space, the rocket still has a little bit of fuel left after filling the void......it is then that the rocket would propel forward.

 

Unfortunately for the rocket..space is frigging huge, so the rocket will expend all of it's fuel into the massive void of the vacuum of space and space will swallow up all it's fuel until the fuel is spent and say, thank you very much Mr rocket...you remain where you are.

 

Simple as that.

You're displaying a fundamental lack of understanding. That video clearly shows how the propeller couldn't produce enough thrust to lift, yet the rocket could. That's Newton's 3rd Law in practise, in a vacuum.

 

You can laugh all you like, wolfy but you're wrong and everyone that does understand Newton's laws will be able to tell you that.

[wolfy 12]

You're displaying a fundamental lack of understanding. That video clearly shows how the propeller couldn't produce enough thrust to lift, yet the rocket could. That's Newton's 3rd Law in practise, in a vacuum.

 

You can laugh all you like, wolfy but you're wrong and everyone that does understand Newton's laws will be able to tell you that.

You are wrong, I am right.

 

There is a very simple experiment that anyone can do to prove a rocket won't work in the vacuum of space.

[The Fish 10779]

You are wrong, I am right.

 

There is a very simple experiment that anyone can do to prove a rocket won't work in the vacuum of space.

Go on then, what's this experiment?

[wolfy 12]

Go on then, what's this experiment?

Get a small balloon and a much larger balloon. Get a tube that will fit tightly into both balloon necks.

 

If you blow up the small balloon and then release it, you will notice that it flies away...this is your basic rocket.

 

Laying the large balloon flat on the table (no air inside) this is the vacuum of space.

Now put your tube in the neck of the flat balloon and blow up your smaller balloon a little bit, then keeping the neck nipped, attach it to the neck of the large flat balloon, then release your grip.

 

What you will find is, your small balloon(your rocket) will expend all it's air into the larger balloon, ( the vacuum of space)...the result is, your small balloon stays where it is whilst the larger balloon has swallowed all it's air (fuel),....this is why a rocket will not work in space.

 

Now try the experiment and anyone else who sees this, try it.

[The Fish 10779]

Get a small balloon and a much larger balloon. Get a tube that will fit tightly into both balloon necks.

 

If you blow up the small balloon and then release it, you will notice that it flies away...this is your basic rocket.

 

Laying the large balloon flat on the table (no air inside) this is the vacuum of space.

Now put your tube in the neck of the flat balloon and blow up your smaller balloon a little bit, then keeping the neck nipped, attach it to the neck of the large flat balloon, then release your grip.

 

What you will find is, your small balloon(your rocket) will expend all it's air into the larger balloon, ( the vacuum of space)...the result is, your small balloon stays where it is whilst the larger balloon has swallowed all it's air (fuel),....this is why a rocket will not work in space.

 

Now try the experiment and anyone else who sees this, try it.

Well apart from all the force of the atmosphere around both balloons keeping them both in the same place. Also, if the empty balloon's made of a less flexible material the smaller balloon would remain more inflated as the force of it's own elasticity returning it to it's original shape (and the pressure of the Earth's atmosphere pressing down upon it) isn't sufficient to stretch the larger balloon past it's original shape.

 

If the smaller balloon is made of very stiff material (say a football inner) and the larger balloon's material is flimsy in comparison then the smaller balloon may inflate the larger (to a degree) but that is not an experiment to show how Newton's 3rd Law operates in a vacuum.

 

This further proves you understand neither the nature of a vacuum, nor Newton's 3rd Law.

[The Fish 10779]

Oh and the friction of the table, the friction of the tube.

[wolfy 12]

Well apart from all the force of the atmosphere around both balloons keeping them both in the same place. Also, if the empty balloon's made of a less flexible material the smaller balloon would remain more inflated as the force of it's own elasticity returning it to it's original shape (and the pressure of the Earth's atmosphere pressing down upon it) isn't sufficient to stretch the larger balloon past it's original shape.

 

If the smaller balloon is made of very stiff material (say a football inner) and the larger balloon's material is flimsy in comparison then the smaller balloon may inflate the larger (to a degree) but that is not an experiment to show how Newton's 3rd Law operates in a vacuum.

 

This further proves you understand neither the nature of a vacuum, nor Newton's 3rd Law.

This absolutely proves you haven't a clue.

[wolfy 12]

Oh and the friction of the table, the friction of the tube.

You honestly haven't a clue.

[The Fish 10779]

This absolutely proves you haven't a clue.

I'm pretty sure that everybody else that does understand Newton's 3rd Law and the nature of a vacuum will back me up. In fact they do, all over the internet, throughout high schools, universities and research centres across the globe. They all say I'm right and they all say you haven't got a scooby doo.

[wolfy 12]

I'm pretty sure that everybody else that does understand Newton's 3rd Law and the nature of a vacuum will back me up. In fact they do, all over the internet, throughout high schools, universities and research centres across the globe. They all say I'm right and they all say you haven't got a scooby doo.

I don't care what others say, they are wrong. The experiment is there to prove they are all wrong.

[The Fish 10779]

I don't care what others say, they are wrong. The experiment is there to prove they are all wrong.

the greatest minds on the planet are all wrong, the great minds, the good minds, the average minds and the dullards are all wrong, but you. and only you are right?

 

[wolfy 12]

the greatest minds on the planet are all wrong, the great minds, the good minds, the average minds and the dullards are all wrong, but you. and only you are right?

 

No fish..the greatest minds on the planet aren't all wrong, they are just twisting the truth to fit a criteria, which is space travel. They know they're lying but to tell the truth would render them unemployed.

 

Reading books and looking at pictures and being lectured on what they want you to know, doesn't make you an expert..

If things don't fit, question them.