Uh, Wayne, you get an "F" in physics. If you were ever NEAR McMasters it would be to clean toilets, it certainly wasn't to attend a physics seminar. UH, my prof said "during combustion a vacuum creeps into the combustion chamber and envelopes it" that is why I said the EXPLOSIONS happen in space. I can prove this idiocy because of the "verandah principle". Then when we had a test, and the question was "Is a rocket an internal or external combustion engine" the CORRECT answer was predicated on whether or not you were writing the exam on a verandah. DUHHHHH
Not_the_Daddy, 2009-07-29 08:42:06

do you honestly beleive a rocket engine is just pushing rocket fuel out the back of the engine? What is making that rocket fuel go out the back of the engine?

So you are saying they just open a valve and that fuel just shoots out the engine and the opposite reaction is the rocket going forward?

That is your beleif?!!!!!

What science class was your last. Grade 6?
wayne, 2009-07-29 08:20:33

Wayne the physicis states: " Now you have no clue as to how a bullet works which is identical to a rocket."

I REST MY CASE. WHAT A MORON.
Not_the_Daddy, 2009-07-28 23:15:48

I want to know where a rocket or the equal a gun and SPACE is involved, aside from the space that you decided must reside in a thin layer in the cumbustion chamber. You know between all those bouncing particles that generate THRUST-you complete GOOF. Oh and your statement a CANNON or A GUN works on the same principle as a rocket, when it took NEWTON to tell you....NO, it is the reactive force we will use for a rocket...DUNDERHEAD.
Not_the_daddy, 2009-07-28 22:52:00

Wow, I want a refund on my educational taxes.
Not_the_Daddy, 2009-07-28 22:10:22

Wayne, you would be lucky to get a deferred F in physics. And you drag McMasters into the argument and state that what you had learned there instructed you that a rocket was AN EXTERNAL COMBUSTION ENGINE. Shame on you, you moron.
Not_the_Daddy, 2009-07-28 22:08:20

Wayne, you are a complete idiot. ZWhen ou get back to the dunderheads at Mc Masters-as if you have even been near the front door....tell them that a gun works on the same principle a s a rocket...that projectile motion is he same is a reactive force. Also, when NASA says, IGNITION, according to your unfathomable "spark" theory they would have to continue repeating "iggnition", ignition: we need more sparks ...IGNITION. We have continuing external EXPLOSIONS from and EXTERNAL ENGINE that requires continuous IGNITION... DUHHHHHH. And you little goof, explain the thin layer of VACUUM that exists INSIDE the combustion chamber, your ONLY way OUT when you stated IGNITION happens in SPACE. I love the VERANDAH explanation. DUHHHH. Uh, "Um the space is a thin layer of vacuum that exist inside the combustion chamber (paraphrasing) that is why ME and MY VERANDAH consider a rocket engine an EXTERNAL COMBUSTION ENGINE. YOU GOOF.
Not_the_Daddy, 2009-07-28 22:05:11

recoil is not even a scientific term fool.

Now you have no clue as to how a bullet works which is identical to a rocket.

I give up. You are clueless
wayne, 2009-07-28 12:48:34

I'll give you a high school lesson in F=ma

2 objects M1 and M2 sitting at rest or moving at a constant speed A1=0 and A2=0 have no force F1=0 and F2=0 The only time they have force is when changing speed A1,A2 does not equal zero. The only time they can transfer force is when F1=F2 and this only occurs at two points, at contact (bounce off) or at rest or constant speed (no force). The point of contact is newtons third law. The gases going out he back you see are in contact with nothing and are not excelerating. They do not create or transfer any force. M1A1=M2A2 only at contact and their masses are greatly different so their acceleration is greatly different. For a tiny gas molecule to move and giant rocket they need very fast A which man can only create through an explosion.
wayne, 2009-07-28 12:46:22

Wayne, IN SPACE, the RECOIL of a shotgun (which is the reactive force) could be used for propulsion. Notice the motion would be in the opposite direction of the projectile tossed, at that point, by the shotgun. You are confusing projectile motion of a bullet which is pushed by expanding gases in the breach of a gun to propulsion which is a reactive force in the opposite direction that mass at velocity is expelled. You have everything bassackwards.
Not_the_Daddy, 2009-07-28 12:07:23