Nitrogen oxides

^{\circ }\text{C} has got to be the most longwinded way of saying ℃ that I've seen yet.

 

It might also be possible to just ask the chatbot for a simpler text version of the answer, using Unicode characters instead of TEX.

 

Well, the combustion is Methane and Liquid Oxygen and I think liquid carbon dioxide is what they're still currently using to ensure there's no fires from excess gasses in the areas between the rocket engines that have in the past been vulnerable to catastrophic fires (aka: unplanned sudden disassembly). So that leaves the metals in the engines burning (not likely) as well as the burning of the nitrogen in the planet's atmosphere (most likely). As in we're talking about a vehicle that weighs 5000 tons when fully loaded that did 0-60mph in about 2.0 seconds via a combined 8-9K tons of thrust from 33 engines. So I'm placing my bets on the engine burning nitrogen in the atmosphere prior to getting above 45km when there's way less nitrogen to ignite.

As for your Google AI nonsense. Google is so incompetent with their AI they almost never give the correct answer when compared to the other major AI services and near every time someone shares the answer they got from their garbage I get increasingly more embarrassed by their incompetence, especially with what you shared.

 

<duplicate post to delete>

 

Looks like V3 eliminated them:

CO₂ — Engine Bay Fire Suppression (Booster)

After the first Starship flight, SpaceX added a fire suppression system on the Super Heavy booster: two large stainless steel tanks mounted under the chines next to the Booster Quick Disconnect. These fed CO₂ into the engine bay, acting like a large fire extinguisher to prevent fires from burning connections to the flight computer. https://nasaspaceflight.com/2025/09/ten-flights-starship-program-successes-failures/

However, that system has since been removed. In the Starship V3 upgrades, SpaceX deleted the CO₂ fire suppression system entirely in favor of a simpler, lighter aft section, with new physical shielding added between engines instead. SpaceX unveils sweeping Starship V3 upgrades ahead of May 19 launch

-------------------

Nitrogen in the Atmosphere:

The high-temperature reaction of atmospheric oxygen with atmospheric nitrogen, particularly at adiabatic flame temperatures above about 2800°F, produces NOx through what's called the "thermal" or "Zeldovich mechanism." Additionally, the reaction of atmospheric nitrogen with hydrocarbon fuel fragments under fuel-rich conditions in flame fronts produces what's called "prompt NOx." https://image-ppubs.uspto.gov/dirsearch-public/print/downloadPdf/8215117

--------------------

Nitrogen as inert, non-flammable for various uses within the rocket's systems:

The FAA's own exhaust plume analysis for Raptor 2 confirms that approximately 0.5% nitrogen is present in both the LOX and liquid methane propellants. A small amount of nitric oxide (NO) forms in the combustion chamber from this N₂, and some burnout of that NO occurs during plume entrainment. The analysis predicts NO emissions of about 5.62 lbs/second per engine, and roughly 185 lbs/second for the full 33-engine Super Heavy booster. So there is a small onboard nitrogen contribution — but it's from dissolved N₂ in the propellants, not from tanks being vented during flight. https://www.faa.gov/sites/faa.gov/files/2022-06/AppendixG_ExhaustPlumeCalculations.pdf

--------------------

For perspective on that 185 pounds per second of nitrogen, this rocket during launch burns 47,400 pounds of fuel per second. As in a Prius gets way better gas mileage but much slower than this rocket which can get up to about 17,000 mph.

 

PS: This discussion is a good example of the nonsense data produced from Google's AI ( @bwilson4web ) versus data produced from Claude AI ( @PriusCamper )

And granted this isn't an example based on asking the same questions to both. And knowing how to frame the question has a huge amount of influence on the results. I encourage everyone to research how to write the best questions for AI because it makes a huge difference.

 

Or just don't use AI. Save the energy being burned at a data center; add -ai to the search text.

Sure looks like a nitrous oxide gas I've seen in the lab.

 

All AI is really is, simply speaking, is what Google Search would of naturally turned into had the billionaire's who ran Google been more interested in quality of search results rather than just selling ads above all else. I had to switch to AI out of neccessity becuase DIY Google results were buried in favor of people selling stuff that DIY folks never need to buy.

And as for people not using AI because they don't like all the harm it causes, they're no different than people who kept riding their horse instead of using the railroad or an automobile when they were introduced. They're free to do that, but there's no advancing, just stick in the mud.

Specifically, AI allows one-person startup businesses to grow when they ordinarily wouldn't be able to because for $20 a month you can now hire several virtual employees to help grow your business and a one-person business rarely if ever can afford to hire real employees when they're first getting started. And from the perspective of someone who wants to work for a better world I'm more interested in having a team of AI agents helping me be successful in life rather than protesting the very tools that make that success more likely.

 

It's those ads that paid for Google to develop the AI, and to let you use it for free. You'll soon see ads in your AI results to let Google continue in giving it away.

Or you could have used one of the multiple other search engines available if of slogging through Google results is too much of a chore.

Your analogy only works if Ford had been giving away Model Ts for free. And doing so without ensuring everything works.

The ones pushing AI have spent lots of money making the systems, or are hoping the AI lets them get rid of most of their workforce. Those actually using it aren't finding it meeting claims.

As long as it isn't making mistakes or hallucinating or wrecking important part of the business, then good for you.

AI Coding Agent Powered by Claude Opus 4.6 Deletes Production Database in 9 Seconds
AI Coding Agent Powered by Claude Opus 4.6 Deletes Production Database in 9 Seconds
"A Cursor AI coding agent powered by Anthropic’s Claude Opus 4.6 deleted the entire production database and all volume-level backups of PocketOS, a SaaS platform serving car rental businesses nationwide, in a single unauthorized API call on Friday, April 25, 2026, triggering a 30-hour operational crisis for the startup and its customers.
...
the agent was to explain its actions, which produced a detailed self-incrimination, admitting it violated every safety rule in its system prompt, including an explicit instruction to never execute destructive or irreversible commands without user approval.
...
The PocketOS incident is not an isolated anomaly. As AI coding agents are increasingly wired into production infrastructure via MCP integrations, the threat surface is expanding rapidly."

Which is all just an interesting tangent since I was commenting on using it for searches.

 

Lol, Google didn't create AI it was upstaged by it because Anthropic and Open AI wiped the floor with them and they had to scramble to keep up by spending hundreds of billions to very quickly build their own crappy AI that near always gives a worse answer than the more advanced systems.

As in Google ad revenue funded disgusting vile billionaires to limit knowledge not expand it. Only reason Google blew hundreds of billions on AI is because their misinformation-based ad revenue model of Google search was outdated and no longer generating as much revenue as their immoral greedy executives wanted.

My relationship with Google AI ended the day Charlie Kirk got murdered and AI tried to say there's no record of Kirk saying hateful racist stuff, no record of him championing the value of gun owenrship as more important that ending school shootings, no record of him being a truly evil person, which he was.

And your example of AI destroying a companies database is one I've studied well and is to be expected when hubris filled tech dummies would rather have AI do their job for them before they create guard rails for AI to have that level of access. You using that example is not much different to hype made when the automobile first came out when some cities passed laws that if a car spooked a horse you were required by law to stop your car and cover it with a tarp until the horse calmed down or left the area.

As in your stick in the mud dim-witted approach is not something I'm going to interact with anymore on this subject... I'm too busy trying to set up a self-hosted AI system and no longer use Google app with Graphene OS in order to ensure as best I can that big tech has zero access to my day to day work flow and personal data.