If NASA faked the moon landings, does the agency have any credibility at all? Was the Space Shuttle program also a hoax? Is the International Space Station another one? Do not dismiss these hypotheses offhand. Check out our wider NASA research and make up your own mind about it all.
Boethius wrote:
Heiwa, are you saying we can burn fuel in the vacuum of space without the benefit of an atmosphere or gravitational field like we have on the earth or the sun? Even if we bring along our own liquid oxygen I don't see how we can burn anything in the vacuum of space except inside of a closed container. Having an open nozzle would violate the integrity of our closed container.
Yes, you can burn stuff in vacuum without the benefit of an atmosphere or gravitational field. The stuff must only be combustible. And if you burn this combustible stuff in vacuum inside a container in vacuum and, if the container is open at one end, the gases due to the combustion will escape there and produce a FORCE ... that will affect the container. BASIC. KISS.
Boethius wrote:
Heiwa, are you saying we can burn fuel in the vacuum of space without the benefit of an atmosphere or gravitational field like we have on the earth or the sun? Even if we bring along our own liquid oxygen I don't see how we can burn anything in the vacuum of space except inside of a closed container. Having an open nozzle would violate the integrity of our closed container.
Yes, you can burn stuff in vacuum without the benefit of an atmosphere or gravitational field. The stuff must only be combustible. And if you burn this combustible stuff in vacuum inside a container in vacuum and, if the container is open at one end, the gases due to the combustion will escape there and produce a FORCE ... that will affect the container. BASIC. KISS.
This is what I'm trying to get at. I'm not talking about nuclear explosions (which aren't even real) but a series of micro explosions in a combustible fuel. I was beginning to think the harder thing to explain about rocketry is how explosions in space work effectively.
Which formula works in a vacuum as it does in a full Earth atmosphere? What kinds of liquid combustions work? (I guess that's one reason to keep the formulas secret; if there isn't even the possibility of one working well, it could just remain 'above top secret' for 'safety reasons'. But perhaps I'm jumping the gun on the argument a bit.)
Boethius wrote:
Heiwa, are you saying we can burn fuel in the vacuum of space without the benefit of an atmosphere or gravitational field like we have on the earth or the sun? Even if we bring along our own liquid oxygen I don't see how we can burn anything in the vacuum of space except inside of a closed container. Having an open nozzle would violate the integrity of our closed container.
Yes, you can burn stuff in vacuum without the benefit of an atmosphere or gravitational field. The stuff must only be combustible. And if you burn this combustible stuff in vacuum inside a container in vacuum and, if the container is open at one end, the gases due to the combustion will escape there and produce a FORCE ... that will affect the container. BASIC. KISS.
Heiwa, you are an Engineer of sorts. Please recreate this phenomenon you describe and post your video on Youtube --- right alongside Jim Fetzer sticking his hand into a pot of molten steel quickly and pulling it out without being burned.
I have fitted this funicular with a hydrojet (such as those propelling modern high-speed ferries) and a giant water tank. Knowing the power of this jet, the weight of the fully loaded funicular and the angle/degree of ascent, would it be possible to estimate how fast - if at all - this thing would be propelled uphill, by spraying water into the air?
Surely, this machine would obey to Newton's laws of motion - as the water ejected would push against the water in the tank - which is, if I am getting this right, the same principle by which NASA's rocket's function in near-vacuum? If not - what am I missing?
brianv wrote:The reason rockets work on earth is because the ground pushes them up. The harder you push against the ground the harder is pushes back.
So, how do rockets fly horizontally then? Or downward?
A: Lift from aerofoil wings!
B: They're falling plus some thrust from the atmosphere above!
It not widely understood that Earth's atmosphere is described as a Fluid! That is where your thrust also comes from! A rocket expels gases against fluid causing forward motion, much like a fish! They can swim up and down and even horizontally.
"An airfoil-shaped body moved through a fluid produces an aerodynamic force. "
I thought the Sun was a super compressed giant ball of gas whose molecules radiate heat and light from the extreme pressure. You are saying it's a giant camp-fire in space?
Why don't I get a suntan sitting in front of my log fire?
brianv wrote:I thought the Sun was a super compressed giant ball of gas whose molecules radiate heat and light from the extreme pressure. Why don't I get a suntan sitting in front of my log fire?
The Sun isn't fire. Fire isn't the spectrum of radiation coming from our Sun. Some evidence indicates the Sun is electric, and not a fusion reactor.
But this is off topic. Stick to rocketry please. We're not recreating Suns inside rockets.
brianv wrote:
It not widely understood that Earth's atmosphere is described as a Fluid! That is where your thrust also comes from! A rocket expels gases against fluid causing forward motion, much like a fish! They can swim up and down and even horizontally.
Rockets are swimming through the air like fish?
So, these are rockets then?
full link: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vIJINiK9azc
