• Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.

Flat Earth: Why doesn't a Plane's altitude meter (gyroscope) pitch up and down if it's a round earth

davedajobauk

dum spiro spero
Site Supporter
Dec 26, 2006
55,183
28,520
77
Salford, Greater Manchester. UK
✟300,707.00
Country
United Kingdom
Gender
Male
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
LOL

ok, believe as you will

The trajectory of a cue ball on a pool table (in a vacuum)
is influenced by contact with the cue
and any subsequent-contact with another ball or the table's edge-cushion

on a table of infinite width and length, and no other balls
with friction removed, the ball would roll on forever, were it not for, gravity

An inflated balloon 'released' in air
would fly away because the pressure behind it was greater than that before it

In a vacuum, it would simply decompress / implode
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

katerinah1947

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Jan 13, 2015
4,690
805
✟81,130.00
Gender
Female
Faith
Catholic
I could not ignore some of this posts content

and would add... that rockets burn and function well, in air BUT
in the vacuum of space, they are totally useless, once a rocket leaves earth's atmosphere
and gravitational influence, that rocket is then FALLING through space ~until
another planetary body 'gets in the way'
There is no possibility (presently) to alter a rocket's direction (course) in-space ~it is in free-fall
Yes, as it approaches another 'celestial body' (mass) it may well receive some gravitational influence
The Moon, has only one-sixth of Earth's gravity... If, the rocket is made to accelerate toward the Moon
Then it is accelerating FASTER than 14 times faster than a average bullet (?)

~when, the rocket arrives, it has to slow down and, be 'captured' by gravity and an atmosphere
for, it's engine to be 'effective'
I thought the Moon had no appreciable atmosphere ?

Does anyone see FUEL TANKS on the lander module ??? (what does it use for Landing and Take-off ?)
Wouldn't it need, AT_LEAST one sixth of the fuel it used, to leave Earth ?

Just some logical thoughts... by no-means 'EXPERT CONSIDERATION'

Hi,

To your well reasoned and thought out reply, no one knew if rockets would work in a vacuum. The first rocket scientist, actually ran an experiment in a vacuum to find out if in fact a rocket would work in a vacuum. It did.

To add, because I worked in a museum with a rocket scientist, the lander did in fact have fuel tanks on it. There was also an orbiting rocket, that the lander was launched from and then later reattached to, to go back to earth.

What is interesting at the time to me, a researcher once upon a time and hopefully even now, is how they treated the rocket scientist of the time. He was bullied verbally and had to leave his home state to hide out.

Even the New York times newpaper criticized him severly. They have since printed a retraction, but a retraction after all the damage was done.

Some of that damage is credited with helping to end the Second World War by some people. It worked like this. The Germans could no longer ask Goddard, how to do this thing or that thing with rockets as Goddard had cut them off as the war progressed.

Then one day, no one could find Goddard in America. That is said, to have caused the Germans to develope the V2, as they were said to be sure, that the Army had secreted Goddary away to develope a rocket to use.

The V2, as an efficient use of resources in the war was not. The enormous amount of money and the 30,000 pounds of potatoes needed to launch every V2 rocket in a time of food shortages, helped it is said to end the war earlier. (Potatoes are fermented then distilled to make ethyl alchol. Ethly alchol, yes drining alcohol was the fuel for V2's and even the Redstone Rocket later made in the US, for countering the Soviet threat that Sputnik posed, and their later launchings posed, as that rocket could have been outfitted with a nuclear weapon in those days.)

What is interesting about Werner Von Braun, is that after the war, and after the US had him in Operation Paper Clip, as that is what Werner Von Braun wanted after the war, to be with the US, with all his research and all his technicians and all his engineers, after the war each and every time, he was lauded for being the most important rocket man of that century, he fired back verbally.

His first attack was to say: "Why are you asking me. You have the foremost rocket scientist in the world." He meant, we The Untited States, have Goddard, the foremost rocket scientist in the world. Yes, the one who even tested to see if rockets would work in a vacuum.

LOVE,
 
Upvote 0

JacksBratt

Searching for Truth
Site Supporter
Jul 5, 2014
16,294
6,495
63
✟596,843.00
Country
Canada
Faith
Protestant
Marital Status
Married
it's true that a plane flies a mild arc, geometrically. You can ask a pilot.
But 8 inches in a mile is quite flat. Very few would argue.

Well, that's eight inches for the first mile. Then it goes logarithmic.

Check this on the lies of wiki and google compared to real math:


2q80apl.png


As you can see, this is not very flat. 32 feet at 7 miles.
 
Upvote 0

Xalith

Newbie
Apr 6, 2015
1,518
630
✟27,443.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
RE: "Rockets wouldn't work in a vacuum".

This has been tested on Earth. We know that rockets can and will fire in a vacuum, and whether or not the force would work, well... ever heard the story about the astronaut and the wrench?

It goes like this:

Astronaut had forgotten to tie his cable to the side of his ship and he slips and is slowly floating away from his ship. He is holding in his hand a wrench, which he then throws behind him (assuming his ship is in front of him). When the wrench leaves his hand, it has a force that is traveling away from him which causes the wrench to begin to fly away from him.

Newton's 2nd Law says that for every force, there is an equal and opposite force.

When he threw the wrench, it now has force -- momentum -- going away from the astronaut and his ship. This means that the astronaut himself now has an equal amount of force that pushes the astronaut towards his ship.

Rocket Exhaust works in the same way. You mix and burn fuel and oxygen inside the rocket and the exhaust is thrown out of the rocket in the form of heat, light, and debris (smoke, etc). This creates thrust, as mass and energy are leaving the rocket. Because there's a force that is leaving the rocket out of the rocket engine, this means that the rocket itself is subject to an equal amount of force in the opposite direction, therefore you get thrust.

You don't need anything to "push against" anything. Newton's 2nd Law says nothing about "pushing against" anything.

Newton's 2nd Law only says about forces and directions. Now if you flail your arms around like you're trying to swim... then yes, you're not going anywhere, because when you swim, you push water away from you which creates a force. This force propels you forward when you are submersed in water. However, if you're in space, and you move your hand... there's nothing for you to move, therefore your arm movement does not create forward momentum. You need to supply an object (in this story, the wrench) to push away from you to create the force necessary to move forward.
 
Upvote 0

ecco

Poster
Sep 4, 2015
2,011
544
Florida
✟5,011.00
Gender
Male
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Private
LOL

ok, believe as you will

The trajectory of a cue ball on a pool table (in a vacuum)
is influenced by contact with the cue
and any subsequent-contact with another ball or the table's edge-cushion

on a table of infinite width and length, and no other balls
with friction removed, the ball would roll on forever, were it not for, gravity



If you throw a cue ball while hovering 10,000,000 miles beyond pluto, the cue ball would go on in that same direction until captured by something's gravity. What is your point?



An inflated balloon 'released' in air would fly away because the pressure behind it was greater than that before it

Right.

In a vacuum, it would simply decompress / implode
Wrong.

You seem to be of the opinion that the air in the balloon needs to push "against something" in order to move and there is nothing in a vacuum to push against. Where did you learn this?
 
Upvote 0

The Barbarian

Crabby Old White Guy
Apr 3, 2003
29,311
13,090
78
✟435,896.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Libertarian
By the way, what city on Lake Michigan has hourglass shaped buildings and hovering top floors that are not supported? I live real close to the lake and do not recall seeing this city anywhere.

It's a fata morgana. quite common on water, caused by atmospheric refraction. So not such a great photo to try to measure a tiny difference in curvature.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fata_Morgana_(mirage)
 
Upvote 0

The Barbarian

Crabby Old White Guy
Apr 3, 2003
29,311
13,090
78
✟435,896.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Libertarian
You don't need anything to "push against" anything. Newton's 2nd Law says nothing about "pushing against" anything.

When James Goddard (who worked out most of the problems involved with making spacecraft in the 1930s) said in an interview that someday rockets would travel in outer space, some nitwit in a newspaper column twitted him by saying that he had forgotten that in the vacuum of space, there was no air for the rocket to push on.
 
Upvote 0

Xalith

Newbie
Apr 6, 2015
1,518
630
✟27,443.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
When James Goddard (who worked out most of the problems involved with making spacecraft in the 1930s) said in an interview that someday rockets would travel in outer space, some nitwit in a newspaper column twitted him by saying that he had forgotten that in the vacuum of space, there was no air for the rocket to push on.

They weren't really thinking about how Newton's 2nd Law works, then. lol.

Another example could be made of why Rockets work but Airplane Propellers do not -- Propellers require matter to push against (air or water). But again, rockets work by pushing matter (and energy) out of the vehicle in an exhaust.

This is hilariously easy to test, just get a water hose and a vacuum chamber (you could make one yourself with a decently strong air pump and airtight chamber), and then turn the water on and see what happens. Try it before pumping the air out, and then try it after pumping as much air out as your pump is strong enough to pump out. You won't get a perfect vacuum, but yet if the hose reacts in much the same way in both scenarios, then it is pretty safe to say that a vacuum wouldn't suddenly stop exhaust from producing force.
 
Upvote 0

keith99

sola dosis facit venenum
Jan 16, 2008
23,111
6,801
72
✟378,651.00
Gender
Male
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Single
Hi,

To your well reasoned and thought out reply, no one knew if rockets would work in a vacuum. The first rocket scientist, actually ran an experiment in a vacuum to find out if in fact a rocket would work in a vacuum. It did.

To add, because I worked in a museum with a rocket scientist, the lander did in fact have fuel tanks on it. There was also an orbiting rocket, that the lander was launched from and then later reattached to, to go back to earth.

What is interesting at the time to me, a researcher once upon a time and hopefully even now, is how they treated the rocket scientist of the time. He was bullied verbally and had to leave his home state to hide out.

Even the New York times newpaper criticized him severly. They have since printed a retraction, but a retraction after all the damage was done.

Some of that damage is credited with helping to end the Second World War by some people. It worked like this. The Germans could no longer ask Goddard, how to do this thing or that thing with rockets as Goddard had cut them off as the war progressed.

Then one day, no one could find Goddard in America. That is said, to have caused the Germans to develope the V2, as they were said to be sure, that the Army had secreted Goddary away to develope a rocket to use.

The V2, as an efficient use of resources in the war was not. The enormous amount of money and the 30,000 pounds of potatoes needed to launch every V2 rocket in a time of food shortages, helped it is said to end the war earlier. (Potatoes are fermented then distilled to make ethyl alchol. Ethly alchol, yes drining alcohol was the fuel for V2's and even the Redstone Rocket later made in the US, for countering the Soviet threat that Sputnik posed, and their later launchings posed, as that rocket could have been outfitted with a nuclear weapon in those days.)

What is interesting about Werner Von Braun, is that after the war, and after the US had him in Operation Paper Clip, as that is what Werner Von Braun wanted after the war, to be with the US, with all his research and all his technicians and all his engineers, after the war each and every time, he was lauded for being the most important rocket man of that century, he fired back verbally.

His first attack was to say: "Why are you asking me. You have the foremost rocket scientist in the world." He meant, we The Untited States, have Goddard, the foremost rocket scientist in the world. Yes, the one who even tested to see if rockets would work in a vacuum.

LOVE,

Not quite correct. It seems Goddard did know rockets could work in a vacuum, the issue was convincing fools who did not understand basic Physics.

http://n4trb.com/Publications/The Rocket Experiments of Robert H Goddard 1911 to 1930.pdf

And it also seems this myth gets perpetuated because systems still get tested in vacuum because some parts can fail in such conditions. Such testing includes not just vacuum, but extreme heat and cold.
 
Upvote 0

FrumiousBandersnatch

Well-Known Member
Mar 20, 2009
15,405
8,144
✟349,292.00
Faith
Atheist
if you are suspended in a vacuum.... (outside of gravitational influence) you cannot move anywhere in any direction, even using rocket energy
rocket exhaust NEEDS to push (against) something... and there is, nothing to push against OUT-THERE...
The rocket exhaust does push against something - the rocket. The rocket pushes the exhaust out the back and that push exerts an equal and opposite force on the rocket.

It's the same principle as being on an ice-rink and throwing or pushing something or someone away from you - if you both weigh the same, you'll each move in opposite directions at the same speed. If you weigh more than what you throw or push, it will move faster than you; if you keep on throwing small things away from you, you'll move faster and faster in the other direction. That's effectively what a rocket does.
 
  • Like
Reactions: BensonInABox
Upvote 0

katerinah1947

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Jan 13, 2015
4,690
805
✟81,130.00
Gender
Female
Faith
Catholic
Not quite correct. It seems Goddard did know rockets could work in a vacuum, the issue was convincing fools who did not understand basic Physics.

http://n4trb.com/Publications/The Rocket Experiments of Robert H Goddard 1911 to 1930.pdf

And it also seems this myth gets perpetuated because systems still get tested in vacuum because some parts can fail in such conditions. Such testing includes not just vacuum, but extreme heat and cold.

Hi,

I am confused about the myth. In page 1 of your article it clearly says that there was a question about Newton's third law being canceled by a near perfect vacuum, thus sucking out all the propellants. It then goes on to say, Goddard then tested that theory and the apparatus is displayed in figure 1.

What is the myth???

LOVE,
 
Upvote 0

katerinah1947

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Jan 13, 2015
4,690
805
✟81,130.00
Gender
Female
Faith
Catholic
Hi,

Of all things. This whole conversation is about a FLAT earth, and the fact that optics abnormalities contribute to the convicitions of some people, robbing them of the truth about the earth being a globe that so many people know about and even work with.

Further an experiment was offered to the person, to see if they needed to see for themselves and hopefully for the whole Flat Earth Society, by going into a MIG 29, in Russia to fly to 60,000 feet and see for themselves. This is a standard item offerred by the Russians.

Weather Balloons are another way to see for yourself, if this planet is really a globe or not. Each of those items is costly. It is roughly 100,000 American dollars for either option used.

However, one experiment, would end this for all time, with the poster, who for some reason or another keeps purporting the earth is flat, but uses incorrect items such as photos and videos with distorted photos, which is inherent in optics.

The video he supplied has a round earth at 8:41. In other videos taken by our government and others the earth goes from soup bowl shape, to flat, to ball shaped all within the same video depending upon the horizons position in the camera.

One experiment, or believing in people who have been in those situations, such as in a high altitude Baloon or a MIG, to avoid the high price tag of proving it to yourself, would end this forever for the poster.

LOVE,
 
Upvote 0

keith99

sola dosis facit venenum
Jan 16, 2008
23,111
6,801
72
✟378,651.00
Gender
Male
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Single
Hi,

I am confused about the myth. In page 1 of your article it clearly says that there was a question about Newton's third law being canceled by a near perfect vacuum, thus sucking out all the propellants. It then goes on to say, Goddard then tested that theory and the apparatus is displayed in figure 1.

What is the myth???

LOVE,

No real physicist held that position. There was no question of hard vacuum canceling newton's third law. There were people who grossly misunderstood that law, there are still a couple in this thread.
 
Upvote 0

katerinah1947

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Jan 13, 2015
4,690
805
✟81,130.00
Gender
Female
Faith
Catholic
No real physicist held that position. There was no question of hard vacuum canceling newton's third law. There were people who grossly misunderstood that law, there are still a couple in this thread.

Hi,

I can totally believe that. I am an experimental researcher. The way I work primarily is to do experiments where the outcome is not totally predictable. I would have used an experiment like Goddards, just to shut everyone up, or shut me up if I was wrong.

So, I did not know that no true Physicist of their day, doubted Newton's third law back then. Thank-you for sharing that.

I just came back from a visit to my old haunt. Evergreen Aviation Museum, the Space side. They called me up to say hi this morning. I went up there to say hi to them. It is about an hour away from my home. I think it was fun, to be in this discussion and then to go and see the Rocket motors, airplanes, and even three full missles capable of taking satellites into space. Additionally they have a lunar rover, the Russian Lunar rover and enough stuff and customers to once again say, Yes, this is reality.

I like the Redstone. I like the Titan II. I like the Titan IIB. I like the fact that the Titan IIB has been used recently, as the Space Shuttle disaster lowered funding and they were used again. The fun part is, they have a 100% success rate, and so far no other motor combination has that.

The lunar second and third stage motors are there. I looked. I like the way cooling tubes are the exit nozzle, meaning the fuel circulates through tubes that form the exhaust nozzle, thus cooling the exhaust cone in all but the Titan II series of rockets, as it seems so weak, but it works and is the industry standard.

LOVE,
 
Upvote 0

SkyWriting

The Librarian
Site Supporter
Jan 10, 2010
37,281
8,501
Milwaukee
✟411,038.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
An inflated balloon 'released' in air
would fly away because the pressure behind it was greater than that before it
In a vacuum, it would simply decompress / implode

Certainly worth the time to try it.
 
  • Like
Reactions: davedajobauk
Upvote 0