Can You Breathe in Space While Rockets Fire?

  • Context: High School 
  • Thread starter Thread starter sensor7
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Space
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion centers around the concept of whether one can breathe in space while rockets are firing, exploring the nature of combustion in a vacuum and the mechanisms of rocket propulsion. It touches on theoretical aspects of space environments, combustion chemistry, and the physics of the Sun.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • One participant suggests that the presence of fire from rockets implies an oxygen atmosphere in space, questioning how rockets can function in a vacuum.
  • Another participant clarifies that space is a vacuum and that rockets carry their own oxidizers for combustion, allowing them to operate without atmospheric oxygen.
  • A further contribution explains that the Sun produces energy through nuclear fusion rather than combustion, challenging the notion of "fire" as it relates to oxygen.
  • Some participants express a preference for precise terminology, arguing that "fire" should be associated with combustion involving oxygen, while others note that popular understanding often simplifies these concepts.
  • There is a reiteration of the idea that the Sun's energy production is independent of oxygen, emphasizing the role of gravity and fusion in stellar processes.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants exhibit disagreement regarding the terminology and conceptual understanding of "fire" and combustion, with some advocating for technical accuracy while others highlight common misconceptions. The discussion remains unresolved on the implications of these definitions.

Contextual Notes

Participants express varying assumptions about combustion and the nature of fire, indicating a dependence on definitions that may not be universally understood. The discussion also reflects differing levels of familiarity with scientific concepts among participants.

sensor7
Messages
2
Reaction score
0
If there is no atmosphere in space, than how could a rocket ship fire it's blasters on the way to the moon? Therefore I think there is an oxygen atmosphere in space, which should you should go ahead and be able to breathe it. If not than I don't see how the space shuttle uses fire based rockets.
 
Astronomy news on Phys.org
Hello and welcome to PF!

To a very good approximation, the space between the Earth and the moon (or anywhere in the solar system) is indeed a complete vacuum. No atmosphere, no nothing. You're quite right in thinking that oxygen is needed somewhere, but it is provided by the rocket mechanism itself by the oxidizer. So in the combustion chamber the fuel and the oxidizer are combined to create the chemical reaction, the very hot (read: fast) products of which are spat out the back of the rocket by the nozzle. Newton's 3rd law does the rest and you're in business.
 
Also please note that the requirement of oxygen for fire only applies for chemical fires (e.g. burning fuel...or basically all the fires you see in everyday life). The Sun, for example, has all that fire while its oxygen content is very low (<1%). This is because the Sun's fire basically just comes from it being so hot, the energy for which is provided by fusion.
 
I'd generally consider "fire" to be synonomous with combusion, which is a chemical reaction involving oxygen. So I wouldn't really consider the sun to be "burning", if we're being technical about it.
 
Yea, but to 99% of the population the Sun is a ball of fire in the sky...<_<

I made the post because I used to always wonder why the Sun can be on fire in an environment with no oxygen.
 
russ_watters said:
I'd generally consider "fire" to be synonomous with combusion, which is a chemical reaction involving oxygen. So I wouldn't really consider the sun to be "burning", if we're being technical about it.

Agree. Always annoys me when popular science describes the sun as "burning hydrogen". To any physicist it's trivially obvious what is meant, but people without this background get too confused by the bad choice of words. Just say fusing. People can deal with that.
 
Matterwave said:
Yea, but to 99% of the population the Sun is a ball of fire in the sky...<_<

I made the post because I used to always wonder why the Sun can be on fire in an environment with no oxygen.
Nuclear fusion is the short answer. It has nothing to do with oxygen. Gravity crushes hydrogen to its ingnition point.
 
Yes...as was my entire point...see post# 3
 

Similar threads

Stargazing Can distance in space be measured by human systems?
  • · Replies 22 ·
Replies
22
Views
4K
High School Why are we still limited in our Moon exploration ambitions?
  • · Replies 22 ·
Replies
22
Views
3K
Undergrad Space Travel to Mars: Overcoming Atmosphere & Creating a Bus Stop in Space
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
3K
New type of rocket propulsion design, and why it might not work?
  • · Replies 27 ·
Replies
27
Views
4K
High School Time to fall from 200 miles
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
Rocket possible collision with Moon
  • · Replies 19 ·
Replies
19
Views
4K
Can I use a Stirling generator to make electricity from our wood fired stove?
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
5K
Undergrad Revolutionizing Space Travel: The Innovative Design of the Circular Module
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
Help with building a school rocket
  • · Replies 24 ·
Replies
24
Views
4K
Graduate Optimal Size of Rocket Engine Nozzle for Vacuum Performance
  • · Replies 26 ·
Replies
26
Views
4K