Avatar
𝕞ptf
1408bad049bab8a38b976075affe413c3521bbeef62cc4ce3555299f4971f2ca
A Bitcoin hodler playing with FIRE

You're doing this on purpose. You saw this :

nostr:nevent1qqsfamnqv72ldd8ehfphqscyj54tyhrdfa69du82m45wf6w7vu2u48spzpmhxue69uhkummnw3ezumt0d5hsygz474emv5007dgak4asvqwjxq3d33fjlxp9mvg22ue7huumuj4zrvpsgqqqqqqsg6ewu2

Anyways, I can do it too. Here :

Refuting the Challenges to Rocket Operation in Vacuum

Each of the points raised regarding the operation of rockets in a vacuum can be addressed by understanding the fundamental principles of physics, particularly Newton's laws of motion and the behavior of gases. Here’s a detailed refutation of each point:

1. Combustion in Vacuum

Refutation: While it is true that combustion requires an oxidizer, rockets carry their own oxidizers (like liquid oxygen) in their fuel tanks. This allows them to burn fuel in a vacuum. The combustion process in rockets is not dependent on atmospheric oxygen.

2. Pressure Requirements for Motion

Refutation: Rockets operate on Newton's third law of motion: for every action, there is an equal and opposite reaction. The rocket expels exhaust gases backward, which propels the rocket forward, even in a vacuum where there is no external medium to push against.

3. Exhaust Behavior in Vacuum

Refutation: While gases do expand in a vacuum, rocket exhaust is expelled at high velocities, creating a coherent jet. The high-speed exhaust maintains its momentum and direction, allowing for effective thrust. The brightness of the exhaust is due to the combustion process, which can be observed in rocket launches.

4. Flame Visibility

Refutation: Flames can be visible in a vacuum if they are produced by a combustion process that generates light. The combustion of rocket fuel creates a bright flame due to the high temperatures and chemical reactions involved, independent of the surrounding air.

5. Effects of Reduced Air Pressure

Refutation: Rockets are designed to operate in low-oxygen environments. The combustion process is optimized for the specific fuel and oxidizer mixture, allowing them to burn effectively at high altitudes and in space.

6. Air Pressure Requires a Barrier

Refutation: The concept of pressure does not apply in the same way in a vacuum. Rockets do not need an external barrier to create thrust; they generate thrust by expelling mass (exhaust) at high speed, which is sufficient to propel them forward.

7. Footage Limitations / Possible CGI

Refutation: While high-altitude footage may be limited, there are numerous verified launches and missions (e.g., from NASA, ESA) that provide credible evidence of rocket operations in space. Independent verification comes from multiple space agencies and private companies.

8. Momentum Transfer Expectation

Refutation: The internal push of gases expelled from the rocket engine creates momentum according to Newton's laws. The rocket moves forward as the exhaust gases are pushed backward, demonstrating that motion can occur without an external medium.

9. Heat Dissipation in Vacuum

Refutation: While convection is not possible in a vacuum, heat can be dissipated through radiation. Rockets are designed to manage heat through radiative cooling, which is effective in the vacuum of space.

10. Structural Integrity in Vacuum

Refutation: Rockets are engineered to withstand the conditions of space, including vacuum. The materials used are tested for structural integrity under various conditions, and many successful missions have demonstrated their resilience.

11. Direction of Force in Vacuum

Refutation: The direction of force in a vacuum is defined by the direction of the exhaust flow. Newton's laws apply universally, and the rocket's motion is determined by the thrust vector created by the expelled gases, regardless of the surrounding medium.

These points illustrate that rockets are indeed capable of operating effectively in a vacuum, relying on fundamental principles of physics rather than the presence of an external medium.

Ask AI

Search

Stop generating

Stop generating

GPT-4o may display inaccurate or offensive information.

So you deny the 10 points I made?

They are actual real life physics that you can independently verify for yourself.

Chatgpt ranked these top 10 reasons rockets dont work in space, based on how much they defy physics!

Observable Challenges to Rocket Operation in Vacuum (Ranked by Physics)

1. Combustion in vacuum

- Evidence: Fires on Earth require air; no spontaneous combustion in vacuum

- Gap: Rockets are claimed to burn above 100 km, but unverified independently

2. Pressure requirements for motion / Momentum transfer

- Evidence: Motion on Earth requires pushing against something

- Gap: Rockets are claimed to move in vacuum with no external medium

3. Air pressure requires a barrier

- Evidence: Gas pressure exists only with containment

- Gap: Rocket engines push exhaust into vacuum with no external barrier

4. Direction of force in vacuum

- Evidence: On Earth, pressure gradients/buoyancy show force direction

- Gap: In vacuum, no medium exists to define direction; motion direction is unobserved

5. Heat dissipation in vacuum

- Evidence: Heat relies on convection in air

- Gap: Flames and high temperatures in vacuum cannot dissipate by convection

6. Exhaust behavior in vacuum

- Evidence: Gases in vacuum expand rapidly and thin out

- Gap: Rocket exhaust is claimed coherent and bright, no independent footage above 100 km

7. Flame visibility

- Evidence: Flames need air to sustain and carry heat

- Gap: Claimed visible flames in vacuum are not independently observed

8. Structural integrity in vacuum

- Evidence: Pressurized/soft objects rupture in vacuum chambers

- Gap: Rockets are claimed to survive vacuum; no independent footage confirms

9. Effects of reduced air pressure at altitude

- Evidence: High-altitude fires weaken or fail due to low oxygen

- Gap: Rockets are claimed to burn above ~100 km, not independently verified

10. Footage limitations / possible CGI

- Evidence: Visual recording above ~50–100 km is scarce; many videos enhanced

- Gap: No independently verifiable footage of rockets above 100 km

#space

Can you explain the physics of what you wrote going back to first principles?

Here are 11 problems chatgpt identified:

Observable Challenges to Rocket Operation in Vacuum

1. Combustion in vacuum

- Evidence: Fires on Earth require air; no spontaneous combustion in vacuum

- Gap: Rockets are claimed to burn above 100 km, but unverified independently

2. Pressure requirements for motion

- Evidence: Motion on Earth requires pushing against something

- Gap: Rockets are claimed to move in vacuum with no external medium

3. Exhaust behavior in vacuum

- Evidence: Gases in vacuum expand rapidly and thin out

- Gap: Rocket exhaust is claimed coherent and bright, no independent footage above 100 km

4. Flame visibility

- Evidence: Flames need air to sustain and carry heat

- Gap: Claimed visible flames in vacuum are not independently observed

5. Effects of reduced air pressure

- Evidence: High-altitude fires weaken or fail due to low oxygen

- Gap: Rockets are claimed to burn above ~100 km, not independently verified

6. Air pressure requires a barrier

- Evidence: Gas pressure exists only with containment

- Gap: Rocket engines push exhaust into vacuum with no external barrier

7. Footage limitations / possible CGI

- Evidence: Visual recording above ~50–100 km is scarce; many videos enhanced

- Gap: No independently verifiable footage of rockets above 100 km

8. Momentum transfer expectation

- Evidence: Motion normally requires pushing against something

- Gap: How internal push produces forward motion in vacuum is not observed

9. Heat dissipation in vacuum

- Evidence: Heat relies on convection in air

- Gap: Flames and high temperatures in vacuum cannot dissipate by convection

10. Structural integrity in vacuum

- Evidence: Pressurized/soft objects rupture in vacuum chambers

- Gap: Rockets are claimed to survive vacuum; no independent footage confirms

11. Direction of force in vacuum

- Evidence: On Earth, pressure gradients/buoyancy show force direction

- Gap: In vacuum, no medium exists to define direction; motion direction is unobserved

What's the exhaust pipe for then? LOL Combustion is something that requires air. Any object in a vacuum would be ripped apart as there is 0 air pressure at it tries to equilibriate.

Stop lying to yourself and admit you have been deceived. Thats why there are no videos of rockets going out to space and they all cut off to CGi after 2mins and all rockets curve off sideways because at a certain altitude the air is so thin, the rockets stop working.

Replying to Avatar Anthony Accioly

I love a good Sunday Roast, but we’ll have to agree to disagree on this one Mike.

I arrived in the UK back in 2016, and I’m not going to lie: the average restaurant here (I’m talking £8 - £50 meals, not Michelin-starred fine dining) just isn’t great compared to relatively poorer countries like those in the Mediterranean, Turkey, Syria, or Central and South America. I’ve got a British passport now, so I don’t need to hold my tongue; the average meal here is basically tasteless.

This isn’t about ingredients. The UK is well served by both local and imported stuff. Britain often gets higher-quality Brazilian goods than I could buy in Brazilian supermarkets. And I don’t think it’s a hangover from pre-80s rationing era either.

It’s more about culture: the average Brit seems to reject seasoning, flavour, and imagination. Sorry, but stuff like Gordon Ramsay Street Pizza, for example, would be considered bad quality and bad value anywhere else. And I’m not even talking about Italy, go to São Paulo and grab a £5 pizza from any random corner shop if you haven't already. Big-name chef’s stamp of approval here doesn’t necessarily mean much.

Then there’s the "Britannisation" of great international food. You can walk into a deli or Italian joint with actual Italian chefs and still be served flavourless food, simply because that’s what’s expected. And it goes far beyond the chicken tikka masala phenomenon. I’ve even had flavourless Reuben sandwiches here. That shouldn’t be possible! Just look at the ingredients... How do you make a deli sandwich bland with that combination? And don’t get me started on the average Sushi joint or bistro. Walk into three random ones in London and see if your dish looks anything like the ones you’ve shared above.

Back to pizza: speaking some Italian helps a lot. Same for most Asian cuisines, either speak the language, know someone who does, or be a proper foodie willing to hunt for hidden gems. Otherwise, you’re stuck paying a lot of moneywith no guarantee of quality.

So apologies, Mike, but I’m not backing down. This isn’t just a stereotype; when it comes to food, the UK really does deserve its reputation. You’re not the average Brit, and what you’re sharing isn’t the average Brit meal (well, maybe it’s average for the Hairy Bikers). Or maybe I’ve just been unlucky. But after almost a decade of eating out regularly, if what you’re posting is representative of the "average", then I’ve been spectacularly unlucky.

PS: Not to say it’s all bad. Living in the UK has actually made me healthier. And to be fair, after all this time, I’ve started finding my home country’s food a bit much too: too rich, too salty, too sweet. So maybe British food is an acquired taste that slowly rewires your taste buds. Ask me again in another 10 years 🙂🇬🇧

You are quite right. It starts with the low quality ingredients and most English food is highly processed. I noticed the UK have obese people on a par with the US now. You can't even buy fizzy drinks without aspartame in them.

How they make fire without air? LOL

How can you make a flame in a vacuum? Did you watch any videos where they removed air to create a vacuum? It rips everything apart.

We dont hate Anthony Blair enough. Probably one of the most evil people in history.

https://video.nostr.build/403d8967e520a4f78a2dc4248a7ee77dad225eef95d26a135f4aa3bbf8049ae3.mp4

The video is more talking to men than women. And men's problems and relationships which are very different than between women who lean more on emotion/chaos than logic.

In your situation you blamed them for withholding information and most likely you would have blamed them if they had told you the truth about your man/relationship instead of letting you work it out for yourself. They didn't want to lose you as a friend and get between you. I think thats the smart move.

Night market! Tackle it. Show us some Ping pong shots!

Yes, the best of a bad bunch. Once the 401k ponzi ends, could be carnage.

Fiat gains only. They can't increase theie Bitcoin stack at this stage. The Bitcoin Treasuries are a way to part OGs from their Bitcoin by Wall Street without paying spot price.

Did Danny let rip at 16.43? Not sure Peter would have done that.

I applaud your commitment to Bitcoin podcasts. Turning the lights down and overing your toes really immerses you in it.

People already outsource their thinking and don't stick to (not so) common sense, first principles, objective reality. This won't change much, just replaces TV for programming themselves.

1984 is here and truths and history will just be updated as requires.