Comments by "Chrnc Avngr" (@aznmutt15) on "Искаженное восприятие" channel.

  1. If there is ether in the chamber then there is ether in space so rockets can still work
    1
  2.  @NormanLy101  you state there is a medium in a vacuum. So there is a medium in space. If there is no ether then there is no medium in the chamber or in space. So the point you brought up is completely pointless.
    1
  3.  @NormanLy101  the whole point of the video is about Newton's third law. No medium necessary. Conservation of momentum also ststes that a rocket would work in a mediumless enviroment. Is mass is loss at speed a force is generated on the opposite direction to keep the overall momentum zero. Nothing to do with mediums. Also ether is just a hypothesis, never been measured or proven. While general releativity has been tested, observed and proven. So why the hell would you believe i something with absolutely no backing?
    1
  4.  @NormanLy101  by the way idea of an ether has been around long before einstein. Many people have tried to test for it and failed. Einstein realized light does not need a medium to travel through because light does not act only as a wave, but a particle as well. So don't tell me Einstein never considered a medium, he just thought it was wrong and unnecessary. By the way scientific theory are rigorously tested and shown to be true by the results. You think a theory and Scientific theory is are the same. Science has a very specific terminology and definitions for the words they use. So your idea of the ether is completely hypothetical and have never been observed.
    1
  5.  @NormanLy101  so why are you trying to contradict the law of motion? Go on ice and throw a beach ball and a medicine ball that are the same size. The amtospheric effect should be the same because atmopheric drag and resistance only has to do with surface area, not density. The reason why you would move more with a medicine ball than a beach ball has to do with the overall momentum and force applied to eject the ball. Another test is with a gun. Does the density of the atmosphere have a significant effect on the recoil? If the recoil is dependant on the force ejecting the bullet then there will be no real significance in felt recoil due to altitude. If the atmosphere is the csuse then there will be a great difference in the felt recoil. Unfortunately for you, there is not.
    1
  6.  @NormanLy101  general relativity has nothing to do with this action.
    1
  7.  @NormanLy101  i thought germs were proven to cause illness. Then why is it called germ theory. You have the understanding of science as a sixth grader. Observation are laws, causes are theories. Get your fact straight.
    1
  8.  @NormanLy101  there is a huge difference in the density of a medium. Hence there should be a difference in recoil. Remember we are testing if the medium is the cause of motion or Newton's third law.
    1
  9.  @NormanLy101  you could fire it in a vacuum, but that is very dangerous because of the bullet and the implosion you will cause.
    1
  10. He wasn't testing the burning of the fuel in a vacuum.
    1
  11. Amateur model rocket motors are built by the thousands by civilians.
    1
  12. How come there is no exhaust leaking out?
    1
  13. All you need to do is map out the forces and it does not seem that strange. A helium molecule is in a tug of war with the buoyant force and the gravitational force. It stops at the equilibrium through the density gradient. Buoyancy and density gradient would not exist without a force down, it does not matter what that force is called. Note density is not a force
    1
  14.  @jrk9372  how does the sr 71 generate thrust at 85,000-100,000 ft? If the atmosphere has a pressure that is 2% that of sea level. More importantly, the top speed is mach 3+. So how is the exhaust supposed to push against the atmosphere that is moving away from it at mach 3+?
    1
  15. Once the exhaust leaves the system to at velocity the force to pushing it out has an opposite reaction pushing against the rocket. This is Newtons third law.
    1
  16. Another example is a gun. Imagine the gun is the rocket, barrel is the exhaust, and the bullet and gasses escaping is the exhaust of the rocket. If what you said is true then the air pushing back is causing the recoil, then the recoil felt would be dependent on the atmospheric pressure. The recoil would be significantly decreased at high altitudes. I'm sorry shooting a gun at 10,000 feet vs sea level does not feel any different.
    1
  17. It get's hard to tell who people are arguing against.
    1
  18. So the exhaust from the ignitor was able to move across the entire chamber and back to push on the rocket in an instant?
    1
  19.  @rickyclark2659  no kidding. They both create thrust by expelling mass at an extremely high velocity out of the exhaust. Not by pushing the exhaust off the atmosphere. But i guess you missed that point.
    1
  20.  @bbj5958  so how can the thrust push off of an atmosphere at supersonic speed?
    1
  21. @Curious Life completely false information. F=ma fundamental law of motion. You have a mass and accelerate it away from you, you create a force. That force has an equal and opposite reaction, another fundamental law of motion. Which leads to consevation of momentum. If you have two bodies of mass and an internal force between the two bodies causing one to be ejected out the bodies would both have to have a change in velocity to conserve momentum. If what you say is true, then a jet engine would never be able to get enough pressure to push off of to gain thrust to go mach 3 in the upper atmosphere. You say it needs to push off the air, yet that medium is moving away fromnthe thrust as fast as the plane is going. Also this would have to effect the recoil of a gun as well. The higher altitude, there should be a significant drop in recoil. Unfortunately this is completely false. You say in a zero g or accelerated state like in free fall or orbit is similar to testing in water is a completely false analogy. The resistance the water would have on the subject would negate almost all effect of the reaction. You are trying to isolate the external forces acting on the system. Gravity does nothing to resist the motion. You would want to minimize all friction including drag. Placing the experiment in the water is increasing friction by many times. But hey, try this in Pool, instead of using your arms to push the bowling ball, use your legs. Your center of mass will be shifted away from the push by a little. Also wouldn't the pressure of pushing off the water greatly increase the force reacting against you, by your logic?
    1
  22. @Curious Life or are you trying to say newtons 3rd law and the conservation of momentum is false?
    1
  23. @Curious Life oh yeah you got one more thing wrong as well. The burn chamber is where the pressure is contained. That pressure is what causes the exhaust to accelerate out. The surounding atmosphere does effect the exhaust. It effects the efficiency of the exhaust acceleration. That is why they use different size bells for different stages.
    1
  24.  @enigmagroup413  quick questions. Is newtons third law correct? Is the conservation of momentum accurate?
    1
  25.  @redsampler2017  oh the car in space. Heat transfers a lot differently in a vacuum than in an atmosphere. Electromagnetic radiaition is the least efficient way of transfering heat. That's why vacuums are used as insulation. With the rotation it's like a rotisserie over a fire. Oneside heats up while the other is cooling down.
    1
  26.  @redsampler2017  this is also a different kind of radiation. It's not the nuclear radiation you are used to hearing about. Lead doesnt protect you from it. We are up there to have a better understanding of the universe around us. Our curiosity allowed us all of the advances we have today. Without the curiosity of what is out there and how it works we will be stuck, stagnant in our advances.
    1
  27.  @redsampler2017  big computer with elementary electronics. Your phone is a million times more powerful than the computers at houston that took up an entire room
    1
  28.  @redsampler2017  once again the vacuum of space is an insulator. The cold would not destroy the car, nor would the slow rise in temperature from the radiant heat.
    1
  29.  @redsampler2017  how much do you think all that shielding weighs? How long do you think we want to be in space for? From launch to return apollo 17 mission w awa s 14 days. It's going to take 3 months just to get to mars. Nasa is pushing long term space habitation. This is a new horizon. They are looking to spend not days, but months in deep space and the long term effects on our bodies and equipment. We have used that past decades understanding and extending our capabilities of surviving in space. It's the difference of a weekend backpacking trip vs preparing a 3 month long excursion into the jungle.
    1
  30.  @redsampler2017  through space we have a better undersranding of our climate and weather. We research the sun and try to understand it's capabilities. We look at the stars to know where we come from and where we can go. The research now will benefit us a decade from now, but the benefits will be beyond what we can imagine. The little advances takes years for us to figure out how it will benefit us. The military and sciences have brought us all of the advances we have. Without looking forward we will get nowhere.
    1
  31.  @redsampler2017  most of the radiation in the belt is from the sun and does not even come close to the surface of the earth. This is because of the magnetic field protecting us. They are trying to minimize the exposure for long term flight. There will be constant bombardment by the solar radiation on the way. Plus the weight is a huge issue. They are looking to protect the crew for months efficiently, not day. That takes us to understand the sun and more.
    1
  32.  @redsampler2017  look there are going to be huge advancements on space and satellite technology in the next decade. You will soon realize the amount of information travelling through space is going to be incredible. The fact that space has become privatized is going to revolitionize the industry. It's going to be sad when you look back at this.
    1
  33.  @frankfacts6207  but the force is shown before it could hit the backstop. How does the force bounce off of the backstop and back up to the rocket to push it?
    1
  34. The fact that he used a high speed camera and showed forces during the ignition sequence instantaneously proves the 3rd law.
    1
  35.  @noneofyourbeeswax01  it's a simple fact that newtons 3rd law and conservation of momentum is what causes the rockets acceleration. An atmosphere does not need to be present to push off of.
    1
  36. @Escape from Plato's Cave maybe if you understood that they have been formed for over a millennia, plenty of time for the water to radiate heat to form ice. I thought the question was to pointless to answer.
    1
  37. @Escape from Plato's Cave just because you do not understand doesn't mean it is a contradiction.
    1
  38. @Escape from Plato's Cave alright lets get to the nitty gritty of newtons third law, something you completely fail to understand. The third law and the conservation of momentum both shows that the atmosphere is not necessary to push off of. By using a force to expell the gas, there is an equal and opposite reaction back on the rocket itself. Now let's try momentum. The gas has a mass and the mass is being expelled at an extremely high velocity. To conserve the momentum of the system the rocket must gain velocity to balance out the momentum of the exhaust. Simple laws of physics
    1
  39. @Escape from Plato's Cave hmm let's take a gun. The gun itself is the rocket, the breach is the burn chamber, the nozzle is the barrel, and the expelled gas and bullet is the exhaust of the rocket. When the gun is fired fhe action causes a recoil, like how it is on a rocket. Except for a rocket it is continuously firing. Now if what you say is true and the rocket needs to push off of something to move, why doesn't the gun have a significant reduction in recoil at high altitudes?
    1
  40. @Escape from Plato's Cave here is another model. The sr71 blackbird can fly at 85,000-100,000 feet and have a velocity of mach 3+. If the atmospheric pressure is needed to push off of, how does it generate enough force to go that fast off of such a thin atmosphere? More importantly how can it push off of an atmosphere moving away along the force at mach 3+? Or is it the force of expelling the exhaust causing the acceleration?
    1
  41.  @noneofyourbeeswax01  all of that verbage and you can't explain why the atmosphere does not effect the gun and the jet engine. It's as if newtons law causes recoil and does not need atmosphere. As if the exhaust being expelled causes thrust and does not need an atmosphere to push off of. Just like a flat earther, can't explain it so you mock it. Come on, tell me why doesn't the atmosphere have any effect on the gun or the jet engine. How can a jet engine push off an atmosphere that is moving away from it at mach 3?
    1
  42.  @noneofyourbeeswax01  also the fact that you do not understand how temperature works is hilarious. Temperature is a measurment of the energy of a molecule. Heat is the exchange of the energy. In simple terms the energy created in the burn chamber of the rocket well exceeds the energy loss through radiation. It has so much extra energy that it is able to convert that energy of heat into kinetic energy and direct it out of the nozzle. Yes a comet is frozen, it has formed in the ort cloud in the deepest parts of the solar system. Where it was formed for thousands, if not millions, maybe billions of years.
    1
  43.  @noneofyourbeeswax01  let's take a quote from Bluffton university's physics department. "Heat transfer is most efficient by convection, then by conduction; radiation is the least efficient and slowest means of heat transfer. Low efficiency of heat transfer means that vacuums make excellent insulation."
    1
  44.  @jacquesmurrell8760  why would it not work in space?
    1
  45. Larger the space the harder it is to create a vacuum. By the way a near vacuum is pretty much the same as a perfect vacuum. It's measured with negative exponential.
    1
  46.  @paulnotdownunder3172   l wow you are comparing the deep oceans pressure with the surface vs the surface to space. Maybe you should actually look up the values. At sea level it is about 15 psi and in space it is 0psi of course. Let's look at that fish you were talking about. Hmm at 30 ft it is about 30 psi, a 15 psi difference. 60 ft it is at 45 psi, that's a 30 psi difference. 90 ft is 60 psi, a 45 psi difference. Guess you do not realize what pressure differential is. You are comparing something that will go through 5-10 the preassure change than a craft would going into space. It is much more dangerous to go to the bottom of the marianas trench than it is to go to space.
    1
  47. So why does is the force felt before the exhaust is created?
    1
  48. Liquid O2?
    1
  49. Which lasted longer? Lump or woodgas?
    1
  50. All of that had nothing to do with what he was trying to show. He was trying to show if there is a force generated by the exhaust in a vacuum. Flat earthers believe that because there is no atmosphere the exhaust has nothing to push against so the rocket will not go anywhere.
    1