OMG 2:41 That is one of the most gorgeous photographs of a Sukhoi I have EVER seen. The camera angle, the colors, the visible condensation in the wingtip vortex, man it's perfect!!!
I love that you showed the failed experiment with the skateboard and fire extinguisher, failure does not mean the science is bad, it might means the engineering is bad. The reverse is also true, bad engineering can lead to validation of bad science, like the many peoples that think they have achieved free energy/perpetual motion. I'm thinking of the people who genuinely believe they have achieved those things, not the scammers.
This is probably the best video you've ever made. The video is in my opinion the perfect length, and the narrative and visuals are just excellent. Lastly, it's very inspirational and makes you curious to find out more. Great job Derek, keep it up!
One thing you forgot to mention, that is making WaterJet slightly better than a regular jet. The thrust generated by water going down is not the only thrust you get. Water coming up to you also carry a momentum pointed vertically UP. And as it get a momentum pointed down, is has to give YOU it's former UP momentun first.
You have to get up to speed by the time you reach orbit so you don't really have much choice. But 3g's is not so bad that you'd really risk blacking out
They actually do have some throttle - they reduce the power down to 70% to limit max stress on the craft as they're accelerating through dense atmosphere
You're trying to explain to me how "Rocket science is one of the most complicated.....", but I'm too distracted by you merrily floating around with a huge grin on your face and a jetpack strapped to your back.
Actually the science behind rockets is quite simple which is what he was conveying in this video. Rocket science of figuring out how to use rockets for traversing through space. You can make a rocket out of common household products like matches and aluminum foil so the science behind how rockets work isn't that complex.
To help clarify what he meant by F=(m-dot)*v, think about the units. m-dot is the rate of mass, as he mentioned, and would have the units kg/sec. This describes the rate of mass ejected from the fire extinguisher. To describe a force, this rate of mass must be multiplied by velocity, rather than acceleration, because 1 (kg/s)*(m/s) = 1 kg*(m/s^2) = 1 Newton. The dot is a notation used to describe the derivative. Hope this helps. :)
This guy is over-structured. After a few minutes into, the first viewing of this video my eye's glazed-over. So,much in fact that, I had bucking of tears squirting from my eye sockets and the last thing I remember were sparks all over the place. After I got out of the hospital with 3rd degree burns do to the electrical fire- I vowed to write this review on my new computer.
Overrated. Go ride a greyhound bus then make the seats smaller by %20 and make the windows really really small then remove your ability to get out of seat and go to bathroom when you want because the isle is so narrow. Commerical airplane travel is horrible. and don't forget to throw in if the plane breaks then you die.
If you redesigned this machine to recycle the water that was expelled and fed back into the intake, could this fly independently? You could add a turbocharger type device to a) increase the pressure of the water going in and b) slow the speed of the water coming out so that it doesn't counteract the thrust. Can anyone please explain if this wouldn't work and why? Thanks.
It wouldn't work. It would be like bringing a box fan onto a sail boat and trying to create your own wind. While the wind hitting the sails would act to push the boat forward, the fan itself would create an equal amount of thrust in the opposite direction counteracting the push from the wind. The same kind of logic would apply to your scenario. While the water being expelled out of the jet nozzle would provide thrust, it would ultimately be redirected back into the intake, and that process would create forces that counteract that thrust, and you'd net to zero. In other words, the very act of slowing the water down in order to bring it back into the intake would create a force in the opposite direction negating the thrust.
Willoughby Krenzteinburg Gotcha, thanks. I was hoping to dispel some of the energy somehow before it reaches whatever mechanism is drawing it back in, but I guess not being able to create or destroy energy would apply. Thank you for your reply.
Willoughby Krenzteinburg Gotcha, thanks. I was hoping to dispel some of the energy somehow before it reaches whatever mechanism is drawing it back in, but I guess not being able to create or destroy energy would apply. Thank you for your reply.
They way vsauce goes off topic is very planned out. They cover things that are related to the main question and I very much enjoy the way he bridges the questions together
Why don't they build an elevated platform on the top of a mountain to launch rockets into space? Each additional meters seem to be extremely expensive…
One thing is... mountains tend to have slightly greater Gravity around them... but that is actually neglectable... Or at least not that important as having less air to cut through. Mostly that is not reasonable, because before launching something from atop a mountain, you have to DRAG all this stuff UP to a mountain. Do you have any idea how much rocket boosters weight? And they ususally are something you can not cut into parts and re-assemble on the launchpad. All that extra cost really outweights the cost of extra-fuel you have to burn to cut through atmosphere. ((Though
***** The problem is both distance and speed (& acceleration)… The closer you are to destination, less fuel is needed. (And less fuel is needed to bring the extra fuel… A thing usually underestimated!)
***** You might be surprised, but most of fuel (like 2/3 in case of Shuttle launch) is burned before a rocket starts gaining any orbital speed. Thick atmosphere generates a ton of friction (a.k.a. Air resistanse) and that means that exiting thick atmosphere a.s.a.p. is a good idea. And the bes way to exit atmosphere is to go straight up and then ditch the accent stage and burn insertion stage.
1. GREAT video 2. AWESOME explanation 3. I want one of these 4. THANKS for nothing , cause now my brain hurts from all this info 5. hope your lip feels better 6. repeat step 1 & 3 as needed
The trouble with getting to space isn't that it's far away... it's frighteningly close from a certain perspective... it's that in order to stay in space once you get there, you need to be moving at orbital speed. The earth is spinning, and the fastest part of the earth is the equator. So being close to the equator is of greater benefit than being up a mountain.
Actually what's interesting is that as you go up out of earth's gravity, the force of it actually lessens. So not only does the weight of the fuel change by the amount used, it also changes by the height of the rocket itself.
So i was watching a dude pull an axe off of his motorcycle and almost attack someone honking at him. Somehow this was a related video... I am now subscribed ^_^
"it's a pretty incredible experience" watching this video. :) also,thank u for clearing the "atmosphere pushing" misconception-which had that before this vid.
F=ma. Therefore, if you change the subject by dividing both sides by "m", you get F/m=ma/m, where the m's on the right side cancel out to give you F/m=a.
Nerds dont even need to invent. They are fun loving curious people who have a sense of adventure. We want to help people enjoy life, rather than put them down.
YES! I had a Toy as a good that was a balloon thing hooked up to water spouts - which you plugged into your garden hose. it was the coolest thing ever! I have often daydreamed about having one again, heh -- and about a human sized one like this. Awesome
The principle is simple enough: "Push stuff one way so that you go the other way." The difficulty is the engineering--making it work in a controllable manner.
I have a question about your explanation of the jet pack. You said that the force of the water changing direction from going up to going down is what pushes the jet pack up but when I was a kid we had toy water rockets. Fill it half with water and half with air. Pump up the pressure in it and when you release it it would take off. No turns in the exhaust, if you will. You also feel that with a water hose.
Force is actually the rate of change of the momentum of the centre of mass of your object, where momentum is P=mv. So, force is actually = d(ma); [d indicates the rate of change or "first order derivative" of the variables]; So, I believe that you can't really negate the effect of pressure that contributes towards the velocity, i.e., the velocity of the exhausted gas changes reduces as the pressure in the chamber falls.. So, I believe that the equation shown should have been *F=**_d_**(mv)*
Was just picturing the converstion: Other Person: "Damn mate, what happened to your face?" Derek: "Well, i collided with a jetski while flying my jetpack."
Light is a wave. Waves behave differently. It's a form of energy, measured in joules. Light is also measured in candelas for intensity. If you really want to find the mass of light then you just use the famous E = mc^2 equation to find the mass of this light. E/c^2 = mass of light dependent on the amount of energy you have to begin with.
The m-dot as part of the formula he described was the "rate of mass". It's the derivative of mass and its units would be kg/sec. This would satisfy F=ma. I hope that explains everything.
very neat stuff, but i wish the physics was correct. In the beginning, F=ma, not F=mv. When talking about the space shuttle reaching orbit the comment, which is something like "most of the acceleration in orbit is horizontal", is incorrect. As it reaches orbit, its velocity becomes constant and all the acceleration is towards the center of the earth...as it FALLS around the Earth. No real biggy unless little Billy is using this for a physics report. Still a fun vid and nicely produced, etc.
Speaking of common misconceptions, the retardant leaving the extinguisher does not make you go forward. The previously balanced pressure inside of the extinguisher becoming imbalanced as the valve is opened makes you go forward.
That is a good point but I heard an explanation some thing like higher altitude equals higher gravitational pull so it would require more force from the rocket to take off and gain speed. I don't know if that's right might be just because they don't like the cold weather on top of a mountain...
Acceleration can be a neutral constant, providing enough force versus resistance (gravity) to equal 0. Therefore, hovering or maintaining a position relative to another object or place. (I hope I explained it right!!).
I see where you are coming from, and I understand your confusion; I was a bit thrown for a second at first as well. What he actually wrote was F = (m dot) times v , where m dot stands for rate of mass expulsion (kg/s) rather than just plain old m, which stands for mass (kg). With m dot, the units work out, because force in Newtons is (kg m/s^2) and m dot times v is (kg/s) times (m/s), so you end up with (kg m/s^2). :)
3:30 - Even better, the thrust actually slightly increases, because the Isp (specific impulse) will increase as atmospheric pressure decreases, while fuel flow remains roughly constant. Even more g's for the astronauts :-)
One thing you should never do is put your arm, hand, legs or any body part infront of that water stream, you could really hurt yourself. You can even hurt yourself at the self car wash water blaster, imagine how much more powerful this water stream is. Reuse, reduce, recycle. Protect yourself and protect life.
KSP isn't a total simulator though. It has the principle of mass decreases so acceleration increases while thrust stays the same, but it was made to be a fun game while showing that space is beautiful, not to be a total simulator.
That is correct. However, in instances where the instantaneous change in mass is equivalent to the average change in mass, you could use either m(dot) or (delta)m. I oversimplified a bit, I suppose.
for those who thought f=m.v when he was talking about the rocket, the v here is the final velocity of the particles, their initial velocity was zero, so the particles are accelerated from 0 to v almost instantly(say about 1 sec at the most, but actually it would be lesser) so f=m(v-0)/t= m.(v)/1=m.v .
Note: F=ma, not F=mv. The only reason that the F=mv equation works here is that we are accelerating the gas etc from 0 to v, so a = v [edit: borrowing a 'per time' from the 'm dot']. But I think it's misleading to write F=mv.
![TIMETHAI - ไม่อยากให้เป็นเขา (Why tho?) [OFFICIAL MV]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/o2qYlGVVtOw/mqdefault.jpg)
Billions of micro organisms passing through the hose and pump had awesome roller coaster ride.
ikr
Xiaoke Ding lol
High-pressure probably killed them all!!!
@@shitbox10yearsago65 For related "Science" click on my name!!!
@@kareemsalessi no
OMG 2:41 That is one of the most gorgeous photographs of a Sukhoi I have EVER seen. The camera angle, the colors, the visible condensation in the wingtip vortex, man it's perfect!!!
Looks like a render. Hope it's not though
@@TikhonSuslov it could be the jet flying past a drone with a very good camera
I love that you showed the failed experiment with the skateboard and fire extinguisher, failure does not mean the science is bad, it might means the engineering is bad. The reverse is also true, bad engineering can lead to validation of bad science, like the many peoples that think they have achieved free energy/perpetual motion. I'm thinking of the people who genuinely believe they have achieved those things, not the scammers.
@@Macsuckks yes you have mentioned their username
This is probably the best video you've ever made. The video is in my opinion the perfect length, and the narrative and visuals are just excellent. Lastly, it's very inspirational and makes you curious to find out more. Great job Derek, keep it up!
One thing you forgot to mention, that is making WaterJet slightly better than a regular jet.
The thrust generated by water going down is not the only thrust you get. Water coming up to you also carry a momentum pointed vertically UP. And as it get a momentum pointed down, is has to give YOU it's former UP momentun first.
Wrong. That's not how it works. There is no water with momentum coming up towards him.
"It's usually a good idea, unless you're in the path of a jet ski." And I the only one that flinched?
*Y E S*
yes...
The force is strong with this one.
Holy crap the guy riding the fire extinguisher cart at 1:44 was my physics professor! Shoutout to Mike Young
thank you for making science SOOO fun:)
You certainly have a great sense of humor. And great teeth too. So glad you didn't lose them. funny and fun.
It's not upwards, it's horizontal - and at that point I imagine you're 'falling' vertically. It's on the NASA graph if you look carefully.
I love people that spread knowledge, thank you.
You have to get up to speed by the time you reach orbit so you don't really have much choice. But 3g's is not so bad that you'd really risk blacking out
6:48 is priceless haha! Bet that jet ski wiped that smile off your face.
They actually do have some throttle - they reduce the power down to 70% to limit max stress on the craft as they're accelerating through dense atmosphere
That intro of him trying the water jetpack is the greatest thing I've ever seen.
You're trying to explain to me how "Rocket science is one of the most complicated.....", but I'm too distracted by you merrily floating around with a huge grin on your face and a jetpack strapped to your back.
Actually the science behind rockets is quite simple which is what he was conveying in this video. Rocket science of figuring out how to use rockets for traversing through space. You can make a rocket out of common household products like matches and aluminum foil so the science behind how rockets work isn't that complex.
yep exactly. Yep exactly. Yep exactly. Yep exactly. Yep exactly. Yep exactly. Yep exactly. Yep exactly. Yep exactly. Yep exactly.
To help clarify what he meant by F=(m-dot)*v, think about the units. m-dot is the rate of mass, as he mentioned, and would have the units kg/sec. This describes the rate of mass ejected from the fire extinguisher. To describe a force, this rate of mass must be multiplied by velocity, rather than acceleration, because 1 (kg/s)*(m/s) = 1 kg*(m/s^2) = 1 Newton. The dot is a notation used to describe the derivative. Hope this helps. :)
I don't see what's soo damn great about it, Chuck Norris does this every time he pisses.
"You just kinda need to trust that the jetpack will get you out of any trouble."
I will live by this.
+Veritasium Thanks for risking your bright shiny teeth for making this video.
This video was AWESOME!!! I love videos that are fun and educational. Keep posting because these are the best!
this reminds me of F.L.U.D.D from super mario sunshine
This guy is over-structured. After a few minutes into, the first viewing of this video my eye's glazed-over. So,much in fact that, I had bucking of tears squirting from my eye sockets and the last thing I remember were sparks all over the place. After I got out of the hospital with 3rd degree burns do to the electrical fire- I vowed to write this review on my new computer.
He sorta reminds me of the Property Brothers...Great video
Great job keeping it simple yet very informative. My 9 yr old can now boast about the physics of rocket science!! Thanks!!
When I use my phone, I experience 4g force. How about that.
LOL you made my day x'D
Here in India we wait for cheaper 2G and reasonable 3G rates...
LOL
LOL
Alexandre Boucher LOL Props on that one.
the best part of this video was learning that if someone goes down fast enough theres a redout
what does Jetski taste?
Corn.
EpelepticMoon Blood
jetski
_Blood_
This man teaches me things I never would have learned in my life...
Super Mario Sunshine.
I was about to say that!
If ever granted the opportunity, I am most definitely doing that in this life time!
SUPER MARIO SUNSHIIIIINE!
woohoo!
When I was a kid I wanted to be an astronaut. Now I'm afraid of height and water.
Fun to watch the videos! thanks
"You know the feeling when you take off on a plane?"
Cant relate😢
Oo thats deep
Overrated. Go ride a greyhound bus then make the seats smaller by %20 and make the windows really really small then remove your ability to get out of seat and go to bathroom when you want because the isle is so narrow.
Commerical airplane travel is horrible.
and don't forget to throw in if the plane breaks then you die.
Great post. I really like ur way of explaining simple stuff.
If you redesigned this machine to recycle the water that was expelled and fed back into the intake, could this fly independently?
You could add a turbocharger type device to a) increase the pressure of the water going in and b) slow the speed of the water coming out so that it doesn't counteract the thrust.
Can anyone please explain if this wouldn't work and why?
Thanks.
It wouldn't work. It would be like bringing a box fan onto a sail boat and trying to create your own wind. While the wind hitting the sails would act to push the boat forward, the fan itself would create an equal amount of thrust in the opposite direction counteracting the push from the wind.
The same kind of logic would apply to your scenario. While the water being expelled out of the jet nozzle would provide thrust, it would ultimately be redirected back into the intake, and that process would create forces that counteract that thrust, and you'd net to zero. In other words, the very act of slowing the water down in order to bring it back into the intake would create a force in the opposite direction negating the thrust.
Willoughby Krenzteinburg Gotcha, thanks.
I was hoping to dispel some of the energy somehow before it reaches whatever mechanism is drawing it back in, but I guess not being able to create or destroy energy would apply.
Thank you for your reply.
Willoughby Krenzteinburg Gotcha, thanks.
I was hoping to dispel some of the energy somehow before it reaches whatever mechanism is drawing it back in, but I guess not being able to create or destroy energy would apply.
Thank you for your reply.
Because the intake would slow down the water, and therefore the device, thus, instead of a rocket, it becomes more like a wheel.
There would be a force downward on the intake which would cancel out the upward force therefore, no flying
They way vsauce goes off topic is very planned out. They cover things that are related to the main question and I very much enjoy the way he bridges the questions together
Why don't they build an elevated platform on the top of a mountain to launch rockets into space? Each additional meters seem to be extremely expensive…
One thing is... mountains tend to have slightly greater Gravity around them... but that is actually neglectable... Or at least not that important as having less air to cut through.
Mostly that is not reasonable, because before launching something from atop a mountain, you have to DRAG all this stuff UP to a mountain. Do you have any idea how much rocket boosters weight? And they ususally are something you can not cut into parts and re-assemble on the launchpad. All that extra cost really outweights the cost of extra-fuel you have to burn to cut through atmosphere. ((Though
Павел Жданов I think what you say is only a hypothesis… It may be wright, but I am not convinced…
The problem for a rocket is not going up. It is going fast enough to achieve an orbit, they need to get 7/8 km/s for a LEO for example !
***** The problem is both distance and speed (& acceleration)… The closer you are to destination, less fuel is needed. (And less fuel is needed to bring the extra fuel… A thing usually underestimated!)
***** You might be surprised, but most of fuel (like 2/3 in case of Shuttle launch) is burned before a rocket starts gaining any orbital speed.
Thick atmosphere generates a ton of friction (a.k.a. Air resistanse) and that means that exiting thick atmosphere a.s.a.p. is a good idea. And the bes way to exit atmosphere is to go straight up and then ditch the accent stage and burn insertion stage.
1. GREAT video
2. AWESOME explanation
3. I want one of these
4. THANKS for nothing , cause now my brain hurts from all this info
5. hope your lip feels better
6. repeat step 1 & 3 as needed
4:19 "Stacked on top of you - OHH OHH YEAH - hey how're you DOWN BELOW HUH? - AH you guys ARE HEAVY, OH MAN PHEW" #HaHGayyyyyyyyyyyyyyyy
xD I was waiting for this comment to po up LOL
+Diego Pomares i was certain there would be a genius to point out
I wish my math teacher would have been this fun, maybe I would have had the math skills to understand more of the science I love :)
7:31 AHH! Derek has a second head!
Finally an explanation that makes sense! I got all of it- Great Video
Dear Santa...
it took an 8 minute video to explain something that 12 years of science teachers could not.
when i clicked veritasium 2 it sent me to a website called buy instagram followers XD
lol me too ??
lol
yep I think that's the problem with really short urls(idk tho)
xD
Probably this will be only comment about your sound design..
amazing sound design
F=mv isn't correct. It's supposed to be F=ma
It's F = dm/dt * v, that's what the dot means.
+Matt Levonian Newton's 2 law
had to share as I saw homeschooling friend Kelly at kidsmarket--we love science
Super Mario Sunshine, anyone?
Dylan Nylan yes!
The trouble with getting to space isn't that it's far away... it's frighteningly close from a certain perspective... it's that in order to stay in space once you get there, you need to be moving at orbital speed.
The earth is spinning, and the fastest part of the earth is the equator.
So being close to the equator is of greater benefit than being up a mountain.
5:33 look at his eyes *hits weed*
Actually what's interesting is that as you go up out of earth's gravity, the force of it actually lessens. So not only does the weight of the fuel change by the amount used, it also changes by the height of the rocket itself.
So i was watching a dude pull an axe off of his motorcycle and almost attack someone honking at him. Somehow this was a related video... I am now subscribed ^_^
"it's a pretty incredible experience" watching this video. :)
also,thank u for clearing the "atmosphere pushing" misconception-which had that before this vid.
This was very cool, I think you did a good job explaining this topic.
F=ma. Therefore, if you change the subject by dividing both sides by "m", you get F/m=ma/m, where the m's on the right side cancel out to give you F/m=a.
I love how he sees himself failing with humour that's how u really need to approach things !!! gj
Great Channel! glad i discovered this..
They should show this video in science class.. I learned more from this video than I did in science class lol
Nerds dont even need to invent. They are fun loving curious people who have a sense of adventure. We want to help people enjoy life, rather than put them down.
YES! I had a Toy as a good that was a balloon thing hooked up to water spouts - which you plugged into your garden hose. it was the coolest thing ever! I have often daydreamed about having one again, heh -- and about a human sized one like this. Awesome
Love the C02 experiment!
Shoosh with your dialogue and just give me the jet pack already! LOL.. so fun!
The principle is simple enough: "Push stuff one way so that you go the other way." The difficulty is the engineering--making it work in a controllable manner.
Am I the only person who tries to remember each and every lesson on each of his videos, so if somebody asked me one of the questions I'd seem smart?
I have a question about your explanation of the jet pack. You said that the force of the water changing direction from going up to going down is what pushes the jet pack up but when I was a kid we had toy water rockets. Fill it half with water and half with air. Pump up the pressure in it and when you release it it would take off. No turns in the exhaust, if you will. You also feel that with a water hose.
Force is actually the rate of change of the momentum of the centre of mass of your object, where momentum is P=mv. So, force is actually = d(ma); [d indicates the rate of change or "first order derivative" of the variables]; So, I believe that you can't really negate the effect of pressure that contributes towards the velocity, i.e., the velocity of the exhausted gas changes reduces as the pressure in the chamber falls.. So, I believe that the equation shown should have been
*F=**_d_**(mv)*
Was just picturing the converstion:
Other Person: "Damn mate, what happened to your face?"
Derek: "Well, i collided with a jetski while flying my jetpack."
Light is a wave. Waves behave differently. It's a form of energy, measured in joules. Light is also measured in candelas for intensity. If you really want to find the mass of light then you just use the famous E = mc^2 equation to find the mass of this light. E/c^2 = mass of light dependent on the amount of energy you have to begin with.
Hold on till the last.... Makes many concepts clear..(and interesting too)....!!
Seriously , who needs collage , I dropped out a year and it was the best decision I've ever made in my life .
The m-dot as part of the formula he described was the "rate of mass". It's the derivative of mass and its units would be kg/sec. This would satisfy F=ma. I hope that explains everything.
Closest? Okay, how was that not flying? honestly that was brilliant!
Another problem is that the fire extinguisher you were using wasn't a CO2 one, it was a powder-based one.
Lucky you... you got closer to flying as I will in my early life...
very neat stuff, but i wish the physics was correct. In the beginning, F=ma, not F=mv.
When talking about the space shuttle reaching orbit the comment, which is something like "most of the acceleration in orbit is horizontal", is incorrect. As it reaches orbit, its velocity becomes constant and all the acceleration is towards the center of the earth...as it FALLS around the Earth. No real biggy unless little Billy is using this for a physics report. Still a fun vid and nicely produced, etc.
Speaking of common misconceptions, the retardant leaving the extinguisher does not make you go forward. The previously balanced pressure inside of the extinguisher becoming imbalanced as the valve is opened makes you go forward.
That is a good point but I heard an explanation some thing like higher altitude equals higher gravitational pull so it would require more force from the rocket to take off and gain speed. I don't know if that's right might be just because they don't like the cold weather on top of a mountain...
@veritasium i had a que that in 0g we will feel more tired or less tired than here on earth if we are running?
Sir pls answer
Acceleration can be a neutral constant, providing enough force versus resistance (gravity) to equal 0. Therefore, hovering or maintaining a position relative to another object or place. (I hope I explained it right!!).
keep up the good work man.
4:26 I really enjoyed that 😂😂😂
You sir, have just blown my mind!
I see where you are coming from, and I understand your confusion; I was a bit thrown for a second at first as well. What he actually wrote was F = (m dot) times v , where m dot stands for rate of mass expulsion (kg/s) rather than just plain old m, which stands for mass (kg). With m dot, the units work out, because force in Newtons is (kg m/s^2) and m dot times v is (kg/s) times (m/s), so you end up with (kg m/s^2). :)
great video!@3:41"it increases at an increasing rate" haha xD
Finally! A question I had since I was 8 has been answered! 7:09 Thanks Veritasium!
3:30 - Even better, the thrust actually slightly increases, because the Isp (specific impulse) will increase as atmospheric pressure decreases, while fuel flow remains roughly constant. Even more g's for the astronauts :-)
I wish that lessons in school were like this i would learn a lot more
One thing you should never do is put your arm, hand, legs or any body part infront of that water stream, you could really hurt yourself. You can even hurt yourself at the self car wash water blaster, imagine how much more powerful this water stream is. Reuse, reduce, recycle. Protect yourself and protect life.
You should do a followup where you talk about the Oberth effect
KSP isn't a total simulator though. It has the principle of mass decreases so acceleration increases while thrust stays the same, but it was made to be a fun game while showing that space is beautiful, not to be a total simulator.
Hi I have a quetion will a space shuttle take off even in vacuum environment.
No, the (dot) is part of the variable. m(dot) is just a way of notating the change in mass. It could also be written (delta)m.
new respect for science.
That is correct. However, in instances where the instantaneous change in mass is equivalent to the average change in mass, you could use either m(dot) or (delta)m. I oversimplified a bit, I suppose.
for those who thought f=m.v when he was talking about the rocket, the v here is the final velocity of the particles, their initial velocity was zero, so the particles are accelerated from 0 to v almost instantly(say about 1 sec at the most, but actually it would be lesser) so f=m(v-0)/t= m.(v)/1=m.v .
Finally understood the throttling down when spacex's rockets reach Max Q
Note: F=ma, not F=mv. The only reason that the F=mv equation works here is that we are accelerating the gas etc from 0 to v, so a = v [edit: borrowing a 'per time' from the 'm dot']. But I think it's misleading to write F=mv.