Latest News

43 Comments on Balls Out Physics Episode 5.1: Propulsion in a Vacuum Chamber

  1. Brian Mullin // 5th Apr 2016 at 2:03 am // Reply

    Note that per theory, the pressure inside of the Smartwater bottle goes to
    zero, so the external air pressure collapses the wall of the bottle
    (approximately 14.7 psi).

    • Squirrel Sniper // 10th Apr 2016 at 1:40 am // Reply

      +unknown cuyler
      You wanting to be the first to test it out with…… Potty mouth!

    • The FLAT EARTH Reality // 10th Apr 2016 at 10:46 pm // Reply

      +Flat Earth Math glad you found brian… he’s a step above most with
      regards to flat earth and physics… I usually have to learn what he is
      talking about, as do most since we are not engineers, but I love every
      moment of watching and learning about it. He’d be a good guy to bounce your
      backyard experiments off of.

    • Awakened IntoFreedom // 11th Apr 2016 at 3:56 am // Reply

      if you have a bleed valve into a second 0 pressure chamber that could hold
      the the volume of the propellent then you could maintain 0 pressure but I
      think the experiment is more valuable if you show a delayed propulsion as
      to say that the co2 canister will move but only when the chamber gets
      sufficient particles to push off from

  2. Dawn of Light // 5th Apr 2016 at 4:50 am // Reply

    Great video liked and shared! I think the only space there is..is the space
    between NASA’s ears but I wouldn’t say it.

  3. Cam TheBaka // 5th Apr 2016 at 8:34 pm // Reply

    Wow no trolls here? This is amazing. I hope they never come

  4. groutaone // 8th Apr 2016 at 1:28 am // Reply

    You are a thinker, I like that. I saw a bit of the myth busters test where
    they had a toy bottle rocket car in a vacuum chamber, when they lit it, the
    toy car moved but I highly doubt they had proper vacuum for such a test, as
    far as I know a perfect vacuum has not been done on earth, I would be
    surprised if they got close to 1/2 atmosphere pressure which would leave
    lots of air in the chamber, even if the test would be done in a perfect
    vacuum the bottle rocket would then likely push off the wall of the
    chamber. I would like to try a balloon powered toy car and use a vacuum
    cleaner from behind it to remove the escaping air and thus should render
    the balloon car immoveable, I have been enjoying your videos, thanks.

    • Bigyeti Technologies // 11th Jun 2016 at 11:54 am // Reply

      +Shawn Barnish by their logic, the propulsion must therefore be
      proportional to thrust, but it isn’t. The Mythbusters test is
      sensationalist nonsense, however there are far more scientific experiments
      on YouTube.

    • Shawn Barnish // 12th Jun 2016 at 1:34 am // Reply

      Yeah mythbusters can be a disappointment sometimes.
      They are a fully produced show but some of the tests are lame.

      I have way too many hobby’s than to focus on one. I kinda lost interest in
      finishing my rocket in a vacuum test. The hard thing of course is building
      a chamber for cheap. Glass jars seem to do ok because the round shape
      withstands the inward pressure.But it’s still a lot of work. I probably
      spent $60 easy just buying a large glass jar and some accessories the last
      time I did it. And in the end the flat-tards will still say it doesn’t
      prove anything or just invent new excuses as always.

      At least I already have the vacuum equipment, micron vacuum gauges etc.
      That’s a $1,000 bucks of equipment that most people don’t happen to have.
      Some day maybe I’ll make good test video.

    • Bigyeti Technologies // 12th Jun 2016 at 11:02 am // Reply

      +Shawn Barnish if Brian built and tested his experiment he'd know for
      certain that rockets work in a vacuum.

      Well, it needs a bit work to make it more scientific, and test it at
      atmosphere pressure, and again with the air removed.

  5. thatsnotfun // 17th Apr 2016 at 10:53 am // Reply

    are you really physicist, or just a crappy psi-op talker? generated vacuum
    sucks, yes. in space is vacuum, yes. that does for sure not mean that the
    space sucks. come on you can impossibly have a degree in physics! space is
    empty + (believed by most astronomers) dark matter. i never studied physics
    and i know that!

  6. Marino Šimić // 26th Apr 2016 at 2:23 pm // Reply

    Why not simply suspend the container into another container like you did
    with the capsule. And after sucking the air out of the inner one, suck the
    outer one as well. Then you can do the experiment without the inner pump
    pumping while the Co2 is triggered.

  7. OK. People. Think! The exploding gas is pushing on everything in all
    directions. Rockets work in space. The thrust is determined by the force in
    the explosion with the ambient pressure causing a gradient. That is all it
    is!!!

    • Brian Mullin // 3rd May 2016 at 2:59 pm // Reply

      +N Hanna Have you witnessed this happen in an infinitely expanding space?

    • +Brian Mullin Brian I am in the process of writing a book that gives
      objective answers that are physics-based that we can prove tangibly. The
      model of the earth is not nearly what has been portrayed and I agree with
      you there. However there are so many demonstrable facts I have encountered
      in my thoughts that can be proven by physics that the earth is not a
      spinning ball. It is imperative that people start to figure this out
      because this is the veil lifting.

    • Brian Mullin // 3rd May 2016 at 9:03 pm // Reply

      +N Hanna Awesome!! Please let me know when your book is available. I do
      believe that propulsion in an infinite vacuum is possible if an action is
      created between two masses, but I don’t think it’s possible with a
      monopropellant. Finding the truth of our world is more important though,
      since most of us can’t go to Space anyway 🙂

    • +Brian Mullin It is actually disconcerting. If there are proofs that almost
      anyone can understand that are super obvious, which I have at least 10 of
      so far, where does that leave me? Because being irrefutable puts you at
      risk. I would tell you some in person, but not over the Internet. Not even
      slightly exaggerating. It makes my stomach hurt a little. Mostly because I
      cannot believe the deception and to what lengths have been gone to. That is
      actually harder to believe.

  8. new perspective // 12th May 2016 at 6:13 am // Reply

    im surprised no one came in with newtons third law….you know the one
    where by a person can lift themselves off the ground by their own
    shoelaces..

    • Bigyeti Technologies // 15th Jul 2016 at 5:48 pm // Reply

      +new perspective upon opening the chamber, it doesn’t go from some
      pressure, P to zero instantly does it?

    • new perspective // 16th Jul 2016 at 2:23 am // Reply

      you have a doubt you dont know i suggest you verify your facts…..

    • Bigyeti Technologies // 16th Jul 2016 at 11:47 am // Reply

      +new perspective I have, and the facts say that rockets work in a vacuum,
      and that spaceflight is real and there is no NASA conspiracy.

    • new perspective // 16th Jul 2016 at 1:36 pm // Reply

      prove to me you can keep pressure in the reaction chamber…youve got no
      force pairs you got no force…

    • Bigyeti Technologies // 16th Jul 2016 at 2:02 pm // Reply

      +new perspective kinetic theory of gas, while gas molecules are bouncing of
      the walls of the chamber, then there is pressure. That’s what pressure is,
      the collisions.

  9. a large vacuum and a small CO2 would mimic space surely?

    • EvenStar LoveAnanda // 6th Jun 2016 at 5:44 pm // Reply

      It will mimic enough to demonstrate that rocket propulsion works in space.
      Which is a no brainer anyways for those of us who truly understand Gravity
      and it’s implications.
      This guy does not have the ability to understand Gravity in all it’s
      implications.
      He even admits he does not understand it.
      I do.

  10. Bigyeti Technologies // 19th May 2016 at 4:19 pm // Reply

    Newton’s third law – “For every action, there is an equal and opposite
    reaction.” When rocket fuel ignites, the chemical reaction creates an
    expanding volume of gas. The pressure is, as you say, pushing on all
    directions at once inside the cannister, and conversely the inside of the
    cannister is pushing back with equal force. Once you break the seal, there
    is nothing pushing back against the gas from the seal end, hence why it
    escapes. However, the gas is still pushing on the other end of the
    cannister and that’s why it is propelled forwards. This isn’t even high
    school level physics.

  11. Fred Kukowski // 27th May 2016 at 9:43 pm // Reply

    Devise a pinwheel, or a propellar.

    Mount the CO2 tank onto one of the blades, and the pinwheel should not be
    able to over come the everexpanding
    vacuum.

    • Fred Kukowski // 27th May 2016 at 9:49 pm // Reply

      In the experiment, you would have to show, the difference between movement
      in atmosphere, and movement in a vacuum.

      Build a chamber, test the motion of the object in atmosphere, record
      results.
      There will be a certain amount of force applied to the walls of the chamber.
      Knowing the size of the chamber, and the speed of the object, and the
      amount of pressure released from the tank. You could repeat the same test
      in a vacuum, and just measure the difference. You could then cancel out the
      force applied on the walls, and the pressure built from the CO2 leak, and
      this would tell you whether or not the object only moved in the vacuum
      based on the pressure built from the leak, and the force on the walls of
      the chamber.

    • Bigyeti Technologies // 1st Jun 2016 at 12:23 pm // Reply

      But that would involve proper science rather than misunderstanding and wild
      conjecture

  12. Dorothy Aldridge // 5th Jun 2016 at 8:40 am // Reply

    providing the vacuum chamber has room to accommodate the released gasses of
    the co2 bottle. . the co2 bottle wont move.. thats my guess
    allways ask never assume.. just because it is accepted dont make it true..
    remember the earth was round or flat, wate is it flat or round now???

  13. crowviking // 26th Jun 2016 at 10:42 pm // Reply

    Brian, its simple man.. any body of mass has its own gravity, so the
    gravity field of the shuttle would prevent the gas from being sucked out of
    space which saves the reaction .. blah blah 😛 Just trying to predict what
    nonsense NASA would try for a rebuttal XD

    Hey, your opinion is actually your calculation. Don’t get trapped into all
    the PC of today’s poppycock. Your calculations are the work that draws us
    to watch.. we know this is not simply an opinion- thank you for all the
    hard work you share with us! :D

  14. getreal155 // 30th Jun 2016 at 10:52 pm // Reply

    In order to prove that rockets don’t work in space you do not need to prove
    that they don’t work at all.
    You only need to prove that a rocket engine delivers less thrust in a
    vacuum. This will save you a lot of troubles building a perfect test tank.

  15. Vladimir Novakovic // 2nd Jul 2016 at 2:03 am // Reply

    nice video. I’ve realized that some time ago. Due to the Jules-Thompson
    law, the gas is sucked into vacuum with no work done, dT=dW=dQ=du=zero

    Also, the very idea of the first cosmic (ie escape) velocity confirms that
    they knew that the rockets can’t propel in vacuum. That is why it is
    important to gain the speed while in atmosphere as after it (after
    approximately the Karman line at, say, 100Km), the propulsion stops.

    The only way to propel would be by firing solid projectiles from the
    rocket, as in that case, the rocket would push against the projectiles

    • Leeloo Fan // 8th Jul 2016 at 7:26 pm // Reply

      +marias man That seals it.

    • Vladimir Novakovic // 8th Jul 2016 at 7:26 pm // Reply

      the brainwashed captives with the Stockholm complex (or maybe even paid
      trolls) pile up garbage over my comments, in order to hide it from
      accidental open minded readers

      Please ignore posts from “Leeloo Fan” and “marias man”, who are here only
      to pollute the discussion.

      Apparently I hit the nail in the head, which turns the trolls on. So here
      it is again, my last comment (burred in the troll’s garbage) on the
      thread’s topics:

      So, to reset:
      Due to the Jules-Thompson law (on gas free expansion in vacuum), the gas is
      “sucked” into vacuum with no work done, dT=dW=dQ=du=zero

      Also, the very idea of the first cosmic (ie escape) velocity confirms that
      they knew that the rockets can’t propel in vacuum. That is why it is
      important to gain the speed while in atmosphere as after it (after
      approximately the Karman line at, say, 100Km), the propulsion stops.

      The only way to propel would be by firing solid projectiles from the
      rocket, as in that case, the rocket would push against the projectiles?

  16. Michael Wolff // 2nd Jul 2016 at 4:00 am // Reply

    You rock dude!

  17. chilipalmer10 // 10th Jul 2016 at 6:57 am // Reply

    I really wonder if the dean at whatever school this yo-yo attended fired
    his science teacher? there is no way this guy has even a rudimentary
    understanding of Newtons laws of motion

    • Leeloo Fan // 10th Jul 2016 at 7:26 pm // Reply

      +marias man I agree. At the beginning I thought he was a true believer, but
      now I am more inclined to think he is faking it.

  18. Jonathan Lawrence // 13th Jul 2016 at 4:00 am // Reply

    This is exactly what I was thinking when I watched myth busters. I am with
    you on the negative psi in space. Makes sense in the context of the model
    we are taught.

Leave a comment

Your email address will not be published.


*


Shares
Share This