Recent Posts

11
Flat Earth Theory / Re: Zeteticism
« Last post by iamcpc on December 09, 2019, 09:22:22 PM »
If you follow the Scientific Method as it is written you will get half-truths and fallacies. The Scientific Method has us coming up with a hypothesis and then performing an experiment around that hypothesis to prove it to be true or false. If it is true, and the experiment comes out in your favor, the next step is to declare yourself to be correct, communicate your results, and it ends there.

I agree with this. The current scientific method really does have some flaws.

However, this is not sufficient. As an example consider Aristotle's theory of spontaneous generation which mankind accepted as true for upwards of 2000 years. If you perform an experiment and put out a piece of meat and find that it eventually rots and flies and maggots develop on it, you would be prone to believe that the prevailing theory of spontaneous generation is true.

I don't think this is a fair example to show the flaws in the scientific method. Aristotle came up with this idea over 2000 years ago. Then, as a result of the scientific method, created many tests to this spontaneous generation. Some provided evidence for and some provided evidence against. Eventually, through hundreds of iterations through the scientific method, enough experiments had provided evidence against spontaneous generation to largely reject it.

In this specific example it took something like 2000 years to test these ideas. The modern scientific method, while still able to provide evidence toward an erroneous concept or idea, are tested much sooner than 2000 years.

For example X rays were used in shoe stores from 1920 to 1970. In 1927 the scientific method started providing evidence suggesting that these were harmful. By the end of the 70's enough evidence had been compiled that the machines were all but extinct.

While a glaring example of the flaws of the scientific method that such machines were allowed in stores in the first place it didn't take thousands of years to come up with substantial evidence against.





Many inventors and researchers already perform a Zetetic form of inquiry without knowing it. When Folding@Home systematically tests many different protein folding combinations across a distributed network to see what works and what does not, the Zetetic method is applied. When the Wright Brothers wrote that they had discarded scientific theories and began from experiment to experience, and that only then could they invent the airplane, they were performing the Zetetic method. Knowledge does not come from the 'logically sound' theories and models of man that are built up in academia, but from experience and nature.

very good point I didn't know about that. I feel the best approach may be some sort of hybrid.

There are pros and cons to having the experiment lead to a hypothesis



and there are pros and cons to having the hypothesis lead to the experiment

12
Air pressure provides a constant 14lbs psi at sea level = 14lbs psi resistance .

.. but it's not resisting.

Surely this is self-evident from the plumes of smoke, steam and AIR being driven at high speed away from the engine?
13
A 3m+ cylinder which we cannot see into ?
Yes. If you watch the video he explains why that is. But air is transparent so how would being able to see in it help you? You can’t tell from looking whether it’s a vacuum or not. The pressure gauge tells you that and it barely moves after the rocket fires. Conclusive proof that the rocket works in a vacuum. And your comments about combustion have been comprehensively dealt with too.

At this point I suggest you’re trolling so I’ll leave it there.
14
nothing passes the sniff test when it comes to NASA

https://www.forbes.com/sites/startswithabang/2017/07/24/sorry-internet-some-of-your-favorite-space-pictures-are-fakes/#7472db02437e

"Sorry, Internet, Some Of Your Favorite Space Pictures Are Fakes"

My opinion is it's all fakery !!!  ALL OF IT....You've lost your way to GOD

Next you'll believe I gained 3.5 inches in space and lost 55 lbs.   space is good !!

The fake you are referring to is GOD.  No such thing except in weak minds.
15
14lbs p.s.i. atmospheric pressure at sea level .
But you have been shown several videos of this working in a vacuum
Have another look at the video I posted:

https://forum.tfes.org/index.php?topic=15502.msg201754#msg201754

I believe your latest "theory" is that the gases the rocket expels which create enough pressure for the rocket to then push off of?
Have a look at the end of the video where there's a slowed down video of the rocket working in a vacuum.
You'll note the pressure gauge barely flickers after the rocket has moved so no, after the rocket has moved it's still pretty much in a vacuum.
And the tube is over 3m long in response to the idea that it could have been pushing off the bottom of the container.
You then changed tack and started about combustion - that has been dealt with above by someone who knows what they're talking about.

A 3m+ cylinder which we cannot see into ? The prof will have to do better  .

14lbs p.s.i. atmospheric pressure at sea level .

... which is not providing any resistance at all to the rocket exhaust. That air is getting blown far, far away, and the result is that air to the above and side of the engine is being drawn in - rapidly - to fill the void.

The air below the engine at start up has been ejected out of the side of the building, with the air from above and side of the engine also being driven out when it gets in the way of the exhaust.





Thought experiment; a single particle of rocket exhaust leaves the engine and hits a single particle of air. How does that transfer forward motion back to the body of the craft? 

Air pressure provides a constant 14lbs psi at sea level = 14lbs psi resistance .

16
Flat Earth Theory / Re: Zeteticism
« Last post by BillO on December 09, 2019, 05:15:06 PM »
As an example consider Aristotle's theory of spontaneous generation which mankind accepted as true for upwards of 2000 years.
I don't think this is a great example, Tom.  Aristotle formed his "theory" strictly from observation and experimentation.  He would observe life emerging from environments where they did not exist before, either existing environments, like pools of water that later produced fish, or created environments, like leaving raw meat out to later observe flies and maggots emerge.  Then formulated spontaneous generation as an explanation.  He strictly followed the Zetetic method, not the scientific method.
17
14lbs p.s.i. atmospheric pressure at sea level .

... which is not providing any resistance at all to the rocket exhaust. That air is getting blown far, far away, and the result is that air to the above and side of the engine is being drawn in - rapidly - to fill the void.

The air below the engine at start up has been ejected out of the side of the building, with the air from above and side of the engine also being driven out when it gets in the way of the exhaust.





Thought experiment; a single particle of rocket exhaust leaves the engine and hits a single particle of air. How does that transfer forward motion back to the body of the craft? 
18
14lbs p.s.i. atmospheric pressure at sea level .
But you have been shown several videos of this working in a vacuum
Have another look at the video I posted:

https://forum.tfes.org/index.php?topic=15502.msg201754#msg201754

I believe your latest "theory" is that the gases the rocket expels which create enough pressure for the rocket to then push off of?
Have a look at the end of the video where there's a slowed down video of the rocket working in a vacuum.
You'll note the pressure gauge barely flickers after the rocket has moved so no, after the rocket has moved it's still pretty much in a vacuum.
And the tube is over 3m long in response to the idea that it could have been pushing off the bottom of the container.
You then changed tack and started about combustion - that has been dealt with above by someone who knows what they're talking about.
19
Now you are just lying.  Most every launch is annonced and people watch them.  Duh
As I've said, I saw a shuttle launch myself. I happened to be in Florida, the launch date and time was on the news, I headed out to watch it thinking (correctly) it would be my only opportunity to do so.

It was at least 15 years ago, before smartphones and before digital cameras had the capacity to record video so I'll hold my hands up here, I've not got any video. Not sure I've even got any photos, I can have a look. But I did see it and I'll never forget how long it took for the sound to get to us when it did go up - we were a fair distance away. When it did it was like an Underground train rumbling under my feet.

Amateur video of these things is very easy to find and if totallackey wanted to stop burying his head in the sand he could make plans to go see one for himself.
20
The reactive force of thrust requires that external pressure.

I refer back to reply #99. There is little or no resistive pressure. The rocket exhaust is driving the air away from the engine. You can see this creating a pressure differential, causing air from above and from the side of the engine to be drawn in, and then also forced downward by the exhaust. The result being the huge mass of air, steam and smoke being driven out of the building.

What external pressure?

14lbs p.s.i. atmospheric pressure at sea level .