Physics question

Discussion in 'Computer Support' started by ->RINGO-, Dec 4, 2003.

  1. ->RINGO-

    ->RINGO- Guest

    I understand (I think) how rockets engines propel the rocket when there is
    air, by 'pushing' against it. How do the engines work in space, where there
    are no air molecules to push against? Isn't space 'empty'?.

    Just looking for a very basic answer, nothing too technical.

    Thanks
     
    ->RINGO-, Dec 4, 2003
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. ->RINGO-

    °Mike° Guest

    It's got nothing to do with pushing against air. It's to
    do with Newton's third law of physics - "Every Action has
    an Equal and Opposite Reaction?" - which means that
    something pushing matter behind itself will move in a
    forward motion.


    On Wed, 3 Dec 2003 22:33:28 -0500, in
    <>
    ->RINGO-< scrawled:

    >I understand (I think) how rockets engines propel the rocket when there is
    >air, by 'pushing' against it. How do the engines work in space, where there
    >are no air molecules to push against? Isn't space 'empty'?.
    >
    >Just looking for a very basic answer, nothing too technical.
    >
    >Thanks
    >


    --
    Basic computer maintenance
    http://uk.geocities.com/personel44/maintenance.html
     
    °Mike°, Dec 4, 2003
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. ->RINGO-

    Liz Guest

    "->RINGO-<" wrote:

    > I understand (I think) how rockets engines propel the rocket when there is
    > air, by 'pushing' against it. How do the engines work in space, where there
    > are no air molecules to push against? Isn't space 'empty'?
    >
    > Just looking for a very basic answer, nothing too technical.


    How jet propulsion engines work
    http://tinyurl.com/xne4
     
    Liz, Dec 4, 2003
    #3
  4. ->RINGO-

    Ed Morgan Guest

    The rocket thrusters they use to maneuver in space do expel mass. In a
    vacuum (no wind resistance) it doesn't take much force (change of momentum)
    to change the attitude of the vehicle.

    I worked on a project 30 years ago where a rapid fire cannon was mounted
    below the center of gravity line of an aircraft. The rate of mass leaving
    the plane (heavy depleted uranium bullets) caused such a force on the plane
    to dip the nose severely. We had to increase the size of the control
    surfaces for the fire control system to keep the guns pointed at the target.

    Ed




    "->RINGO-<" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > I understand (I think) how rockets engines propel the rocket when there

    is
    > air, by 'pushing' against it. How do the engines work in space, where

    there
    > are no air molecules to push against? Isn't space 'empty'?.
    >
    > Just looking for a very basic answer, nothing too technical.
    >
    > Thanks
    >
    >
     
    Ed Morgan, Dec 4, 2003
    #4
  5. ->RINGO-

    gangle Guest

    http://quest.arc.nasa.gov/space/teachers/rockets/principles.html

    "->RINGO-<" wrote
    > I understand (I think) how rockets engines propel the rocket when there is
    > air, by 'pushing' against it. How do the engines work in space, where there
    > are no air molecules to push against? Isn't space 'empty'?.
    >
    > Just looking for a very basic answer, nothing too technical.
    >
    > Thanks
    >
    >
     
    gangle, Dec 4, 2003
    #5
  6. Ed Morgan wrote:

    > The rocket thrusters they use to maneuver in space do expel mass. In a
    > vacuum (no wind resistance) it doesn't take much force (change of momentum)
    > to change the attitude of the vehicle.
    >
    > I worked on a project 30 years ago where a rapid fire cannon was mounted
    > below the center of gravity line of an aircraft. The rate of mass leaving
    > the plane (heavy depleted uranium bullets) caused such a force on the plane
    > to dip the nose severely. We had to increase the size of the control
    > surfaces for the fire control system to keep the guns pointed at the target.
    >
    > Ed


    Something tells me I know which project you're talking about. If I'm
    right, Thank You for making one of the Butt-Ugliest planes known to
    man... My brother flies one, and has been safe through some hostile
    airspace.

    --
    --

    BuffNET Technical Support Supervisor
    (BEHOLD! The power of the BOFH!)
     
    BuffNET Tech Support - MichaelJ, Dec 4, 2003
    #6
  7. ->RINGO-

    Jimmy Dean Guest

    On Thu, 04 Dec 2003 04:04:17 GMT, "Ed Morgan"
    <> wrote:

    >The rocket thrusters they use to maneuver in space do expel mass. In a
    >vacuum (no wind resistance) it doesn't take much force (change of momentum)
    >to change the attitude of the vehicle.
    >
    >I worked on a project 30 years ago where a rapid fire cannon was mounted
    >below the center of gravity line of an aircraft. The rate of mass leaving
    >the plane (heavy depleted uranium bullets) caused such a force on the plane
    >to dip the nose severely. We had to increase the size of the control
    >surfaces for the fire control system to keep the guns pointed at the target.
    >
    >Ed


    I believe the A-10 WartHog tankbuster does something like this. The
    charge propelling the "bullet" (40 mm calibre?) resembles the old
    style milk bottle. A few such projectiles can demolish most tanks.

    jd
     
    Jimmy Dean, Dec 5, 2003
    #7
  8. ->RINGO-< wrote:

    > I understand (I think) how rockets engines propel the rocket when there is


    No, you don't.

    > air, by 'pushing' against it. How do the engines work in space, where there


    No, that's not how...

    > are no air molecules to push against? Isn't space 'empty'?.


    ....or they *wouldn't* work in a vacuum.

    ****In terms too simple to really be completely accurate*****, but which might
    give you a basic grasp:

    Imagine a blown up balloon. The pressure inside is pushing equally in
    all directions. So it sits there, because the forces in all directions
    are self cancelling -- any direction in which the air is pushing on a
    side of the baloon, it's pushing equally on the opposite side. It's a
    a tug of war with no winner -- no motion. Now, open the neck of the
    balloon. The pressure there, is no longer being held back. But there's
    pressure in *all* directions, remember? This means that the pressure on the
    "front end" of the balloon - opposite from the neck - is no longer being
    balanced by the pressure on the neck, which has simply become a stream
    of escaping air. So......with no offsetting pressure at the rear, the
    pressure on the "front end" pushes the ballon "forward". The air stream
    at the neck is not "pushing on the outside air" -- it's simply failing
    to offset the "forward" pressure, by leaving the balloon, instead.

    For your rocket, just replace the balloon with a hard casing instead
    of the rubber, and replace the pressurized air, inside, with a burning
    fuel mixture that's trying to expand in all directions. The hole is now
    in the rear of the *rocket* (remember the open neck of the flying balloon),
    and the "forward" forces of the expansion - not offset by the rearward
    pressure - push the rocket forward.

    Yes, fellow scientists, I *said* that wasn't the whole story. The
    guy thought the rocket was "pushing on air", and he's not going to get
    the whole story in a minute's read, so let's trade Scientific American
    for *relative enlightenment*, this time. :)

    --
    Blinky - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Linux RU 297263
    [still no new sig]
     
    Blinky the Shark, Dec 5, 2003
    #8
  9. ->RINGO-

    Dick M. Guest

    Nobody has explained where the rocket gets the
    air to throw out its nozzle. Of course, in outer
    space it can't use air, so it must use some mass
    from inside the rocket instead.

    ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
    >
    > Imagine a blown up balloon. The pressure inside is pushing equally in
    > all directions. So it sits there, because the forces in all directions
    > are self canceling -- any direction in which the air is pushing on a
    > side of the balloon, it's pushing equally on the opposite side. It's a
    > tug of war with no winner -- no motion. Now, open the neck of the
    > balloon. The pressure there, is no longer being held back. But there's
    > pressure in *all* directions, remember? This means that the pressure on

    the
    > "front end" of the balloon - opposite from the neck - is no longer being
    > balanced by the pressure on the neck, which has simply become a stream
    > of escaping air. So......with no offsetting pressure at the rear, the
    > pressure on the "front end" pushes the balloon "forward". The air stream
    > at the neck is not "pushing on the outside air" -- it's simply failing
    > to offset the "forward" pressure, by leaving the balloon, instead.
    >
    > For your rocket, just replace the balloon with a hard casing instead
    > of the rubber, and replace the pressurized air, inside, with a burning
    > fuel mixture that's trying to expand in all directions. The hole is now
    > in the rear of the *rocket* (remember the open neck of the flying

    balloon),
    > and the "forward" forces of the expansion - not offset by the rearward
    > pressure - push the rocket forward.
    >
    > Yes, fellow scientists, I *said* that wasn't the whole story. The
    > guy thought the rocket was "pushing on air", and he's not going to get
    > the whole story in a minute's read, so let's trade Scientific American
    > for *relative enlightenment*, this time. :)
    >
    > --
    > Blinky - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Linux RU 297263
    > [still no new sig]
     
    Dick M., Dec 5, 2003
    #9
  10. ->RINGO-

    gangle Guest

    In a rocket it's not about air. It's about the ACTION of the
    burning fuel hitting the rear of the rocket outake, which creates the
    REACTION of the rocket being propelled in the opposite
    direction with an equal force.

    "Dick M." wrote
    > Nobody has explained where the rocket gets the
    > air to throw out its nozzle. Of course, in outer
    > space it can't use air, so it must use some mass
    > from inside the rocket instead.
    >
    > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
    > >
    > > Imagine a blown up balloon. The pressure inside is pushing equally in
    > > all directions. So it sits there, because the forces in all directions
    > > are self canceling -- any direction in which the air is pushing on a
    > > side of the balloon, it's pushing equally on the opposite side. It's a
    > > tug of war with no winner -- no motion. Now, open the neck of the
    > > balloon. The pressure there, is no longer being held back. But there's
    > > pressure in *all* directions, remember? This means that the pressure on

    > the
    > > "front end" of the balloon - opposite from the neck - is no longer being
    > > balanced by the pressure on the neck, which has simply become a stream
    > > of escaping air. So......with no offsetting pressure at the rear, the
    > > pressure on the "front end" pushes the balloon "forward". The air stream
    > > at the neck is not "pushing on the outside air" -- it's simply failing
    > > to offset the "forward" pressure, by leaving the balloon, instead.
    > >
    > > For your rocket, just replace the balloon with a hard casing instead
    > > of the rubber, and replace the pressurized air, inside, with a burning
    > > fuel mixture that's trying to expand in all directions. The hole is now
    > > in the rear of the *rocket* (remember the open neck of the flying

    > balloon),
    > > and the "forward" forces of the expansion - not offset by the rearward
    > > pressure - push the rocket forward.
    > >
    > > Yes, fellow scientists, I *said* that wasn't the whole story. The
    > > guy thought the rocket was "pushing on air", and he's not going to get
    > > the whole story in a minute's read, so let's trade Scientific American
    > > for *relative enlightenment*, this time. :)
     
    gangle, Dec 5, 2003
    #10
  11. Dick M. wrote:
    > Nobody has explained where the rocket gets the
    > air to throw out its nozzle. Of course, in outer
    > space it can't use air, so it must use some mass
    > from inside the rocket instead.
    >


    It's a chemical reaction - not too dissimilar to a bottle-rocket. You
    bring together 2 chemicals that are, seperatly, stable... and WHAMMO!
    instant exhaust gasses that push against the rocket casing as it
    expands... and therefore pushes the rest of the vehicle.

    SEE? I *did* learn something from Star Trek!

    --
    --

    BuffNET Technical Support Supervisor
    (BEHOLD! The power of the BOFH!)
     
    BuffNET Tech Support - MichaelJ, Dec 6, 2003
    #11
  12. Dick M. wrote:

    > Nobody has explained where the rocket gets the
    > air to throw out its nozzle. Of course, in outer


    Except that I did explain that. Read what I wrote, below.
    Pay attention to, "for your rocket...replace the pressurized
    air, inside, with a burning fuel mixture..."

    > space it can't use air, so it must use some mass
    > from inside the rocket instead.


    It's called burning fuel. They carry it in...follow along, here...
    fuel tanks.

    > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~


    >> Imagine a blown up balloon. The pressure inside is pushing equally in
    >> all directions. So it sits there, because the forces in all directions
    >> are self canceling -- any direction in which the air is pushing on a
    >> side of the balloon, it's pushing equally on the opposite side. It's a
    >> tug of war with no winner -- no motion. Now, open the neck of the
    >> balloon. The pressure there, is no longer being held back. But there's
    >> pressure in *all* directions, remember? This means that the pressure on

    > the
    >> "front end" of the balloon - opposite from the neck - is no longer being
    >> balanced by the pressure on the neck, which has simply become a stream
    >> of escaping air. So......with no offsetting pressure at the rear, the
    >> pressure on the "front end" pushes the balloon "forward". The air stream
    >> at the neck is not "pushing on the outside air" -- it's simply failing
    >> to offset the "forward" pressure, by leaving the balloon, instead.


    >> For your rocket, just replace the balloon with a hard casing instead
    >> of the rubber, and replace the pressurized air, inside, with a burning
    >> fuel mixture that's trying to expand in all directions. The hole is now
    >> in the rear of the *rocket* (remember the open neck of the flying

    > balloon),
    >> and the "forward" forces of the expansion - not offset by the rearward
    >> pressure - push the rocket forward.


    >> Yes, fellow scientists, I *said* that wasn't the whole story. The
    >> guy thought the rocket was "pushing on air", and he's not going to get
    >> the whole story in a minute's read, so let's trade Scientific American
    >> for *relative enlightenment*, this time. :)


    >> --
    >> Blinky - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Linux RU 297263
    >> [still no new sig]





    --
    Blinky - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Linux RU 297263
    [still no new sig]
     
    Blinky the Shark, Dec 6, 2003
    #12
  13. ->RINGO-

    Dick M. Guest

    The point being that fuel is normally used to heat air,
    while in this case the fuel is used as something to
    eject from the rocket and make it move.


    ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

    "Blinky the Shark" wrote
    >
    > It's called burning fuel. They carry it in...follow along, here...
    > fuel tanks.
    >
     
    Dick M., Dec 6, 2003
    #13
  14. ->RINGO-

    docmill Guest

    "Dick M." <> wrote in
    news:f5fAb.23824$ZE1.17690@fed1read04:

    > The point being that fuel is normally used to heat air,
    > while in this case the fuel is used as something to
    > eject from the rocket and make it move.
    >
    >
    > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
    >
    > "Blinky the Shark" wrote
    >>
    >> It's called burning fuel. They carry it in...follow along, here...
    >> fuel tanks.
    >>

    >
    >



    Now you're getting into the Flaming post.

    --
    +++++++++++++ SEND ME A LINK +++++++++++
    Docmill's "Home of Hot Links in the FryingSpam"
    No Lemmings or pseudo-plonkers were amused by this post, but I tried.
     
    docmill, Dec 6, 2003
    #14
  15. Dick M. wrote:

    > The point being that fuel is normally used to heat air,
    > while in this case the fuel is used as something to
    > eject from the rocket and make it move.


    Yes: fuel makes it go.

    Something in your above statement makes me think you still
    believe that the propellant "pushing on the outside air"
    is what makes the vehicle move.

    --
    Blinky - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Linux RU 297263
    [still no new sig]
     
    Blinky the Shark, Dec 6, 2003
    #15
  16. ->RINGO-

    Dick M. Guest

    I would think the action of throwing the fuel out
    the back end of the rocket is what causes it to
    move forward. Action & reaction.

    ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

    "Blinky the Shark" wrote
    >
    > Something in your above statement makes me think you still
    > believe that the propellant "pushing on the outside air"
    > is what makes the vehicle move.
    >
    > --
    > Blinky - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Linux RU 297263
    > [still no new sig]
     
    Dick M., Dec 6, 2003
    #16
  17. ->RINGO-

    gangle Guest

    I've already stated that the force of the burning fuel upon
    the rear rocket surfaces (not the actual "throwing out" of the fuel)
    is the action, thereby causing the equal force of reaction
    that moves the whole rocket in the opposite direction
    of that of the original force: F1 = F2
    << >>

    "Dick M." wrote
    > I would think the action of throwing the fuel out
    > the back end of the rocket is what causes it to
    > move forward. Action & reaction.
    >
    > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
    >
    > "Blinky the Shark" wrote
    > >
    > > Something in your above statement makes me think you still
    > > believe that the propellant "pushing on the outside air"
    > > is what makes the vehicle move.

    >
     
    gangle, Dec 6, 2003
    #17
  18. ->RINGO-

    fkasner Guest

    gangle wrote:
    > I've already stated that the force of the burning fuel upon
    > the rear rocket surfaces (not the actual "throwing out" of the fuel)
    > is the action, thereby causing the equal force of reaction
    > that moves the whole rocket in the opposite direction
    > of that of the original force: F1 = F2
    > << >>
    >
    > "Dick M." wrote
    >
    >>I would think the action of throwing the fuel out
    >>the back end of the rocket is what causes it to
    >>move forward. Action & reaction.
    >>
    >>~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
    >>
    >>"Blinky the Shark" wrote
    >>
    >>>Something in your above statement makes me think you still
    >>>believe that the propellant "pushing on the outside air"
    >>>is what makes the vehicle move.

    >>

    >
    >


    False! Force is a vector quantity so F1 <> F2 but F1=-F2 .
    The chemical reaction (or if no fuel is burned)the physical changes
    causes the exhaust gases to exert one of the forces on the body of the
    rocket. Or another waay to look at this is the momentum of the system is
    zero before igniting the fuel. As the fuel expands relative to the
    center of mass of the system is momentum (also a vector) increases in a
    direction opposite to the desired direction of motion of the rocket. The
    maintenance of constant momentum requires that the rocket acquire an
    equal momentum in the opposite direction to the direction that the gases
    moved away from the rocket. So the constancy of momentum remains equal
    to the starting zero momentum.
    FK
     
    fkasner, Dec 6, 2003
    #18
  19. ->RINGO-

    Brian H¹© Guest

    gangle said:

    > I've already stated that the force of the burning fuel upon
    > the rear rocket surfaces (not the actual "throwing out" of the fuel)
    > is the action, thereby causing the equal force of reaction
    > that moves the whole rocket in the opposite direction
    > of that of the original force: F1 = F2
    > << >>
    >


    www.absey-vine.co.uk/~temp/f1.jpg

    :)

    > "Dick M." wrote
    >> I would think the action of throwing the fuel out
    >> the back end of the rocket is what causes it to
    >> move forward. Action & reaction.
    >>
    >> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
    >>
    >> "Blinky the Shark" wrote
    >>>
    >>> Something in your above statement makes me think you still
    >>> believe that the propellant "pushing on the outside air"
    >>> is what makes the vehicle move.
     
    Brian H¹©, Dec 6, 2003
    #19
  20. ->RINGO-

    Mr. Smiley Guest

    Ed Morgan wrote:
    > The rocket thrusters they use to maneuver in space do expel mass. In a
    > vacuum (no wind resistance) it doesn't take much force (change of
    > momentum) to change the attitude of the vehicle.
    >
    > I worked on a project 30 years ago where a rapid fire cannon was
    > mounted below the center of gravity line of an aircraft. The rate of
    > mass leaving the plane (heavy depleted uranium bullets) caused such a
    > force on the plane to dip the nose severely. We had to increase the
    > size of the control surfaces for the fire control system to keep the
    > guns pointed at the target.
    >
    > Ed
    >
    >
    >
    >
    > "->RINGO-<" <> wrote in message
    > news:...
    >> I understand (I think) how rockets engines propel the rocket when
    >> there is air, by 'pushing' against it. How do the engines work in
    >> space, where there are no air molecules to push against? Isn't space
    >> 'empty'?.
    >>
    >> Just looking for a very basic answer, nothing too technical.
    >>
    >> Thanks


    Uranium bullets? Come on!


    --
    the abominable toner

    computer maintenance links & tips on:
    http://www.hal-pc.org/~toner27/
     
    Mr. Smiley, Dec 10, 2003
    #20
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. Robert Feinman

    New Fuji camera creates new laws of physics

    Robert Feinman, Aug 7, 2003, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    22
    Views:
    968
    Robert D Feinman
    Aug 12, 2003
  2. Silverstrand
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    806
    Silverstrand
    Sep 21, 2006
  3. ½ Confused
    Replies:
    5
    Views:
    293
    ASAAR
    Feb 21, 2006
  4. The physics behind a metronome.

    , Feb 21, 2006, in forum: Computer Support
    Replies:
    2
    Views:
    3,648
    penguin676
    Feb 22, 2006
  5. dfrog

    Quantum Physics

    dfrog, Mar 1, 2006, in forum: Computer Support
    Replies:
    16
    Views:
    596
Loading...

Share This Page