Show Posts
This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.
Joule's expansion.Sorry, but Joule (not Joule’s) expansion is not the same thing as Joule’s Law. Gases expanding in space has nothing to do with the reaction force of the combustion moving the rocket.
It is about gas freely expanding when it is released to a vacuum.
You are clearly stating the gas exhaust (something which is part of the rocket, a single closed system, as something entirely separate, like the other person.
It is foolish and you are writing crapola.
You have absolutely no idea what you are writing. Gas released to vacuum performs 0 work. It freely expands.
Joule's Law.
Inside a combustion chamber there is the introduction of a mass of fuel at a low relative velocity. The fuel mass is set on fire. That releases energy. One end of the combustion chamber is closed to the product of the combusted fuel. The other end is open to the outside of the engine. Since the pressure is lower on the outside, the combusted fuel accelerates out in that direction. The accelerated fuel mass produces a force equal and opposite to its acceleration vector.
Any pressure on the outside of the rocket engine will inhibit the exhausts acceleration. Since the force is proportional to the mass acceleration the less external force outside the rocket engine the more force will be produced. This means that a rocket will be more efficient in a vacuum than in an atmosphere.
Do explain
Trying to equate two people pushing off each other to the operation of a rocket is just plain stupid, so do everyone a favor and stop posting bs.
a person pushes off of you, moving you in the opposite direction. The gas pushes off of the rocket, moving the rocket in the opposite direction. Both examples start as closed systems, and end with two parts separated by the force.
It doesn't matter what your source claims, there is a plume related to all jets and rockets (i.e., we see what is typically called a contrail), and that plume reacts with the pressurized external environment to form a force pair, which results in movement. No force pair, no movement.
You should have asked about conservation of momentum in general rather than angular momentum in particular.What "angular momentum?"
I’m not talking about rockets in this case. I’m asking simply if you believe the concept of conservation of angular momentum to be correct. Out of curiosity. Literally a yes or no question.
I'm still curious about what quality of an exhaust plume allows it to push off a medium less dense than itself.
What "angular momentum?"
Do everyone a favor, okay?
Go peddle your nonsensical crapola elsewhere.
I am done with your dissimilar anologies.
The plume is like any appendage and is what allows the rocket or jet to push off the atmoplane.
No defined exhaust (plume)... no movement.
Jesus, you double down to claim it is only an internal combustion absent any exhaust resulting in movement.
No concept of a force pair exists in your fake and false description.
Combustion takes place separately and distinctly from the exhaust process.
Your posts are nonsensical and reek of desperation.
Hold onto your folly.
Leave reality to the sane.
”In the space vacuum the exhaust gases form a large free jet, called a plume, which can impinge on neighbouring surfaces.”
https://doi.org/10.1016/0376-0421(91)90008-R
No, a plume cannot form in an environment where there is no pressure.
No external pressure outside the rocket?
No plume.
No plume?
No movement.
The end.
And I agree the terms, "aren’t just randomly used interchangeably," so it would be beneficial for everyone if you stopped doing just that.
I already stated how rockets move.
And I agree the terms, "aren’t just randomly used interchangeably," so it would be beneficial for everyone if you stopped doing just that.
”In the space vacuum the exhaust gases form a large free jet, called a plume, which can impinge on neighbouring surfaces.”
https://doi.org/10.1016/0376-0421(91)90008-R
Again, switching between the terms "space," and "deep space," is kinda funny.”In the space vacuum the exhaust gases form a large free jet, called a plume, which can impinge on neighbouring surfaces.”
https://doi.org/10.1016/0376-0421(91)90008-R
Rockets can work at altitudes of 60-80 km.
”In the space vacuum the exhaust gases form a large free jet, called a plume, which can impinge on neighbouring surfaces.”
https://doi.org/10.1016/0376-0421(91)90008-R
What’s the altitude where the plume stops being a plume and why? Why is the shape of exhaust arbitrarily no longer called a plume to you if you go higher?
It seems your article is inserting contradictory adjectives.
There is a shape in both of your pictures, of course. One is more defined. but again, your paper is specifically writing, ""60-80 km...". Not an outer space vacuum environment.