Has someone a valid explanation for this?
(media.conspiracies.win)
You're viewing a single comment thread. View all comments, or full comment thread.
Comments (96)
sorted by:
The real answer?
What’s on the table is the capsule suit, not what’s worn outside the capsule. The exit suits are FAR more insulated...had that suit/ those boots been worn outside he would’ve either frozen solid or burnt to a crisp depending on what time it was.
(The temperature varies from nearly minus 300° Fahrenheit during the night to plus 212° when sunlit.)
Now try explaining how a fuel propelled rocket navigates through a vacuum
It doesn’t. The liquid fuel thrusters are utilized then dropped before leaving atmosphere. After that inertia thrusters are used. Think of them as controlled explosions...if you fire a rifle in space, it still recoils....the difference is that in space that rifle shot won’t just hurt your shoulder, it will send you on a perpetual journey.
Look: Your lack of understanding the physics doesn’t mean it’s a hoax...it means you need to focus on learning the science. ??♂️
That's easy. Rockets don't push off anything like you are probably thinking.
Ever action has an equal and opposite reaction. Rockets thrust is thrown in the opposite direction they are traveling on. Imagine thousands of tiny baseballs being thrown in the opposite direction. That is what a rocket does.
And it can burn in a vacuum due to oxidisers.
There is no air to push against in a vacuum.
The burnt and expanding fuel and oxegen creates an area of very high pressure directly behind the vehicle
You're right, the globers are fucking just brainwashed AF
That's what I said. Rockets don't need to push off anything and they also don't need O2 to burn.
It is ejecting matter into a vacuum pushing the object.
Also: Rocket fuel contains oxidizers...usually hydrogen peroxide. These, for lack of a better term, create their own oxygen to burn. Same reason that you can shoot Roman candles under water and they still burn.
Yes, underwater rockets exist of course and the type of propellant isn't necessarily relevant to the argument.
It's that in a vacuum, devoid of any matter or molecules, that roman candle has nothing to push against.
It's like falling out of an airplane and trying to swim through the air to get to a lake (sort of a bad example because here we do have air resistance and it would work, but just to illustrate the idea.)
Wrong.
Sorry man, but you are out of your depth on this...inertial thrust doesn’t need an atmosphere.
Newton’s law applies in space as well.