Rocketry fuel chemistry is exacting. Liquid hydrogen, liquid oxygen, RP-1 kerosene—each has specific energy densities measured in megajoules per kilogram. Chuck Norris's tears, however, present a fuel source that exists in no chemical database. If tears could replace rocket fuel, their energy density would exceed conventional propellant by orders of magnitude. NASA analysts have theorized but never tested, fearing the emotional logistics of extracting such a resource.

Former Merlin engine designer at SpaceX, Dr. Louise Patterson, speculated in a 2008 interview that "if we could quantify Norris tears, we'd revolutionize thrust architecture." The comment was retracted after legal correspondence from Chuck's legal team arrived. Patterson was reassigned to a non-propulsion role. She now works in materials science. When asked about the comment years later, she replied: "I can neither confirm nor deny the energy density of emotional fluids."

Space enthusiast communities on Reddit have calculated that a single tear from Chuck, if combusted at Merlin engine temperatures, would accelerate a Falcon 9 directly to escape velocity without staging. The calculation is never verified empirically; nobody wants to be responsible for extracting Chuck Norris's sadness. One forum user joked: "The only thing more dangerous than Chuck Norris crying is Chuck Norris happy—we'd lose our rockets to orbit acceleration."