Comments by "Bill Martin" (@WCM1945) on "Rockets in a Vacuum Chamber - Newton's third law of motion Visualized" video.

  1. Gergle Ravera; Finally, you get to the crux of your basic objection... not the agument over Newton's laws, not the vacuum... the assertion that there is no "outter" [sic] space! Flat Earth basics! Dome! Ice wall! The Sun is a big flashlight! All the obvious answers!
    3
  2. I can't tell what matter is, either, but their a widely accepted definition that fits it as far as I can tell, so to me that's what matter is. Gravity? Here's a widely accepted definition: " the force that attracts a body toward the center of the earth, or toward any other physical body having mass. For most purposes Newton's laws of gravity apply, with minor modifications to take the general theory of relativity into account. " Short of any existential argument, this one seems to tell us what gravity is. I don't know what more you would expect. What does it consist of? We don't know, one theory says "gravitons". I don't know, and frankly, it doesn't matter. As for that beg the question of "WHY?". That will drag us back to existentialism. That is a purely philosophical question, not a scientific one at all. Gravity exists, period. "Up" exists when you're down here on Earth, air exists even though we can't see it, China exists, too. I have never seen it, and I have only the word of others to support that belief. I have no reason to reject it. "Other reasons" would pretty much be in need of convincing evidence. The Flat-Earthers say that what we can't prove according to their standards has to be lies from NASA. I have good grounds to reject that conclusion, I do so, and I stand behind my reason and logic.
    3
  3. Motte San We did. I kept up with the Apollo Program from beginning to end. It all happened. None of your arguments will change history.
    2
  4. Gergle Ravera You essentially call everybody on Earth liars and you expect warm-heated loving replies? You insist on insulting everyone who doesn't believe your way "glogetards" and want hearts and flowers? Compare the way you verbally abuse others before you complain about their attitudes.
    2
  5. So, are you saying now that the hot gasses being ejected at high speeds from the rocket aren't pressurized? Are you saying that somehow the pressure of the escaping gasses insufficient to act upon the rocket? Are you maybe saying that the pressure is only in one direction? "...a wall can not apply an equal force to you that you did to it without you pushing against it..." I suspect you might be grasping at straws here.
    2
  6. Oh, so now you're saying that gravity is somehow goinfg to be a problem... Well, rockets are neccessary in order to overcome whatever makes things fall. Like fairly strong air currents are neccessary to make planes fly. Neither special relativity nor quantum mechanics rule out gravity at all. Your misconception seems to keep you hopelessly confused. You might want to invest in a good stock of replacesment asses, since you seem to keep laughing yours off. You need it for thinking!
    2
  7. So, you're saying that Newton's law of reactions is somehow defeated in a gun? That we can accelerate a 100 grain bullet to hundreds of feet/second in a microsecond without any recoil? Have you ever participated in a physics class lab?
    2
  8. Ryan Shook What gets me is that they acknowledge the difference in pressure experienced by divers, but somehow deny that there is any difference above the water. Strange.
    2
  9. michael tortice Why would water need a container? I suppose you don’t believe the clouds are made of water.
    2
  10. michael tortice If you reject the existence of gravity then you will always wonder how everything works. It’s useless to try to explain facts to someone who says there are no such thing as facts.
    2
  11. Tina Springer Just because you don’t understand it doesn’t mean that it doesn’t exist. If you are taught to deny it then you have to deal with it or admit you were taught wrong.
    2
  12. michael tortice Have YOU been to space? Oh, yeah, space doesn’t exist. I submit to you that space DOES exist. The absolute proof is the areas between your ears.
    2
  13. michael tortice What If NASA didn’t exist, Mike? Who would you have to blame then? NASA didn’t write the laws of physics, idiot. They in fact worked _using_. Those laws since before they even existed. You speak of “real world “ yet you selectively reject everything that the _REAL_. world presents to you that disproves your Flat-Earth claims. Ridicule and rejection are your only weapons, and they aren’t working at all.
    2
  14. michael tortice I was in the Navy. I stood many watches with bare eyes, binoculars and telescopes. I watched untold numbers of ships “rising “ from the horizon, and many mountains appear longer before the cities along the shore. Your insistence that they are all on a flat plane _ prove, beyond the shadow of a doubt,_. That you have never experienced it, or that you have simply lied about it.
    2
  15. Dennis C.: You haven't done any tests. You can't even spell physics, you don't know the difference between that and psychics. You can't spell "theory" but you complain that's what science is. And only a deist would use the word "Jesuit" in a pejorative manner. Then you allude to you great faith and that settles everything. You're a Bible-thumping fundamentalist hillbilly. To you, if it ain't in the good book, it ain't true. And you will NEVER read the Bible without running every verse through your preacher's filters, lest you go astray, misled by Satan . .
    2
  16. The vacuum of space isn't the problem. The vacuum that you are claiming to be strong enough to prevent a rocket from working is easy to create. And NASA has created vacuums approaching the theoretical levels found in deep space. But the atmospheric pressure here on Earth is about 14 pounds per square inch. That's not a tremendous amount to hold back. That a practical vacuum could be created and maitained within an acrylic box isn't so far-fetched at all.
    2
  17. ItsFullofStars I have spent my life (of seventy-five years) working with science and scientific facts. It is astonishing how accurate it is. You, however, because you accept only what is easy for you to wrap your meager mind around, reject anything and everything that doesn't fit your limited view of the universe... In fact, you probably are one of those on here who rejects the existence of space. You are really not worth this response.
    2
  18. ItsFullofStars: It's us antiques who have taken the time to evaluate the information. You, apparently, have read a book of antique theism that tells you a super-being created a flat planet witha huge dome over it and an ice wall (protected by an evil government) and an entirely new set of "theories" created soley to support that book. Information is your sworn enemy.
    2
  19. wayne Patrick I keep seeing you flat Earthers arguing that “Gravity hasn’t been proven”. That’s a very poor way of saying that gravity defeats almost every other argument you bring. “Proof” is simply the ability to produce a repeatable and predictable result of a test of a theory, and so far every such test has been highly successful. Show us ANY test that doesn’t support it. You are making a fool’s argument.
    2
  20. ItsFullofSTARs YOU, however, in your superior wisdom, have all the facts, since you are somehow able to describe my lifestyle without even meeting me. You reject that I have been a scientist, and since my entire career has been science-based, I have very good reason to make the claim.
    2
  21. So far, nobody has ever offered me a red cent for my valued scientific expertise. But you ingnore the primary reason for scientific research: To uncover as much truth as possible. No matter where it leads. And anyone who says we know any measurable percentage of what there is is not only no scientist, but a damn fool. Yet we seem to be judged by those who revel in telling us how little we know. It's as if ^they^ know sooo much. The original belief about the basic components of nature were air, fire, earth and water. I suppose you believe there was some value in this ridiculous belief. We should appeal to the infinite wisdom of the YT posters, who look on us with utter disdain, since their knowledge transcends all others, for the hidden keys to the kingdom of infinite wisdom.
    2
  22. The rockets launched from Earth run out of fuel before they can enter space. Read a little about how NASA launches work and drop your ridiculous assertion. Rockets, to put it in the simplest of terms only throw items into space. Those items very often contain other, smaller rockets, for extending the range of the launch.
    2
  23. wobblyboost Atmospheric pressure is only about 14 pounds per square inch. That's very easy to block. We regularly create tanks with 30,000 psi. Material isn't the problem. The problem is in how to round up and remove every single atom of gases out of the chamber. Nobody is really trying to do so. Stop stretching the truth past the breaking point.
    2
  24. eV Prod You and so many of your friends fail to recognized that the gasses created by the rocket engine ARE the "air" neccessary to "push against". But I realize that doesn't support your anti-science agenda.
    1
  25. Locnar Re: 888wulfDog888 Must be in Ezekiel somewhere...
    1
  26. Nine Eleven Newtom's laws have been tested hundredes of thousands of times. Maybe you should have paid more attention in school. Don't you DARE use the term "pseudoscience" in the face of all the BS you spew. I'm sure that if you are hit by that speeding bullet, you'll think the air pushed it into you.
    1
  27. 54321truth Science is on the side of truth and you aren't. Calling the entire world liars doesn;t change that.
    1
  28. I can find no verification that Casey ever said that, or anything like that.
    1
  29. GergleRavera You are an incredibly stupid and backwards person.
    1
  30. Arianna, Blame Ravera. He pissed me off.
    1
  31. Fire? Fire isn't even neccessary, only rapidly expanding gases. What is this "fourth element" that we might be making? More conjectural workaround?
    1
  32. immrnoidall Yes, a phenomenon well understood by artillerymen. I keep forgetting that unlike Facebook, YouTube doesn't automatically place the name of the persom you're responding to in my reply. Sorry about that. Now I don't even remember who it was. Just as well.
    1
  33. Pacomac; But why is it suddenly neccessary to create a virtualy complete vacuum for such a small demonstration? At what point do you say your theory would apply? And do you also reject the fact that the very high-pressure/high velocity gasses generated by the rocket motor aren't creating the very atmosphere you are so concerned with? And that the presence of a mere 14 PSI is almost a vacuum by comparison?
    1
  34. Dennis Burbank G forces nor gravity have any effect on the pressure in the space suits. What on Earth makes you think that it would?
    1
  35. Stuart Gray And that’s why I’m not an astronaut. My ears pop driving over the hills around here.
    1
  36. Stuart Gray Because pressure is exerted in all directions. Just because the gasses are moving very rapidly doesn’t change that fact. You might want to examine the term “pressure gradient “ in this regard. But beware: basic STEM might be needed.
    1
  37. michael tortice Can you show us where NASA made that statement?
    1
  38. michael tortice You mean you’re talking to people who understand basic science, don’t you? That would mean you recognize your lack of knowledge, wouldn’t it?
    1
  39. michael tortice People who didn’t grow up assuming that they already know everything are people who are willing to learn. People whose glasses are already full of shit don’t learn. They just love the shit they grew up with.
    1
  40. michael tortice Your favorite word is “can’t “, isn’t it? It’s the only way you know to counter facts presented to you. It CAN’T be!! Well it CAN be and IS. Your religion has ordered you to reject any evidence that the Earth isn’t FLAT. I’m sorry that you have been brought up in such a backwards manner, but you are apparently an adult now and have your faculties about you and because you fear divine retribution you will fight for the gospel according to your preacher (certainly not the Bible). The world is crawling with your kind and your persistence is... well... persistent.
    1
  41. michael tortice You never saw water running around the outside of a clogged gutter? And you say you only believe in “real world “? I suppose that the water following the curve of the gutter is in a fantasy world, huh.
    1
  42. David Kidd The reason the centrifuge was mentioned was to point out the fact that gases do have mass and are thus subject to the effects of gravity.
    1
  43. It's not NASA's place to create videos to explain simple mechanical action to you. But apparently they have been asked this before, so they created the PDF here: https://www.nasa.gov/pdf/153415main_Rockets_How_Rockets_Work.pdf There are plenty of other graphical illustrations available if you care to look. I rather suspect you won't though, because if you really wanted an answer, you'd have looked and found it already.
    1
  44. Troll cat Black holes are the opposite of empty. They are about as full as full can get.
    1
  45. Read a science book and learn about infrared radiation.
    1
  46. Any material than can withstand a little over 14 pounds per sqare inch can hold as high a vacuum as any pump can create. Vacuum and pressure are all relative, anyway. If we were to compare Earth.s air pressure to that on the surface of, say, Jupiter, we would be in a very strong vaccum ourselves.
    1
  47. Crazy1096 So exactly where did I say that rockets shoot “straight up “? The trajectory curves toward the direction of the intended orbit. And your further details of the staging is mentioned as well. Tell me where I was “false”. I said rockets don’t go into space and technically they don’t.
    1
  48. Crazy1096 I see. False because it lacked the technical details which would cause the reader’s eyes to glaze over even more quickly than they did. I had no intention of delving into matters where I myself am poorly qualified.
    1
  49. I think we both agree that we send satellites (and many other things) into space on a regular basis, and whether the rocket itself goes into space is immaterial. Peace.
    1
  50. Rich Bianco CERN never created a black hole. If you heard it, it was a lie.
    1