The Electric Comet theory

[Sol88]

Works great RC, if indeed you ever find the "Ice"

 

[Sol88]

On July 4, 2005, Deep Impact obtained the highest resolution views of a comet nucleus to date. Some 30% of the surface of Tempel 1 was imaged at better than 10 m/pxl. These data revealed several unexpected features including pervasive layering and smooth areas with flow-like characteristics. Several distinct layers ranging from 10 to 200 meters in thickness and of significant lateral extent can be identified. It is likely that some of these layers extend deep into the body of the comet. At least two areas of remarkably smooth terrain are present. The better imaged is an elongated flow-like tongue about 3 km wide, 1 km long and 200 meters thick which displays many characteristics of a down-hill flow emanating from a possible source area only a few hundred meters wide. The detailed characteristics of the layering and smooth areas will be summarized and possible formation models presented. Suggestions of nucleus layering exist in earlier, lower resolution images of both Borrelly and Wild 2. Optimistic viewers may even see suggestions of smooth flows in Deep Space 1 images of Borrelly

My bold.

Looks like Bunnies! remember none of us our allowed to look for bunnies in pictures looks like a down hill flow....please, looks like a bunny to me

 

[Reality Check]

Ha ha ha ...snipped even more ignorance....

That is really laughable ignorance, Sol88 - it is (quite advanced) orbital mechanics that planets migrate backed with observational evidence.

planetary migration

Planetary migration occurs when a planet or other stellar satellite interacts with a disk of gas or planetesimals, resulting in the alteration of the satellite's orbital parameters, especially its semi-major axis. Planetary migration is the most likely explanation for hot Jupiters, extrasolar planets with jovian masses, but orbits of only a few days. The generally accepted theory of planet formation from a protoplanetary disk predicts such planets cannot form so close to their stars, as there is insufficient mass at such small radii and the temperature is too high to allow the formation of rocky or icy planetesimals. It has also become clear that terrestrial-mass planets may be subject to rapid inward migration if they form while the gas disk is still present. This may affect the formation of the cores of the giant planets (which have masses of the order of 10 Earth masses), if those planets form via the core accretion mechanism.

Of course this ignorance of orbital mechanics is excusable in someone who does not know that 0.1 is less than 3.0
Open question for you, Sol88 (18th September 2014): is 0.1 less than 3.0?

Electric comets still do not exist! (26th August 2013)

 

[Reality Check]

My bold.

Yes the flow looks like a flow that we see from known physics, Sol88 .
This has nothing to do with the electric comet delusion: Electric comets still do not exist! (26th August 2013)

 

[Reality Check]

Works great RC, if indeed you ever find the "Ice"

What does this gibberish mean, Sol88?
I am not looking for any "Ice" or "ICE" or even "icE" !

 

[Sol88]

Originally Posted by Sol88 View Post
Works great RC, if indeed you ever find the "Ice"
What does this gibberish mean, Sol88?
I am not looking for any "Ice" or "ICE" or even "icE" !

We suggest that the regions of smooth terrain which were observed on Comet 9P/Tempel 1 by the Deep Impact spacecraft were formed by blowing ice grains in an outburst of gas from the comet interior.

from your quote RC...blowing ice grains..the ICE you keep looking for!!! and thats the best possible explination??? what about the bright edges of the smooth terrain?

in the photo above they question whether it's uncovering old ground or CREATING new ground.

You came up with blowing ICE??? get your hand off it

Reality Check, you may not quite understand the implication of ICE (of any kind) is needed, absolutely...otherwise

 

[Sol88]

That is really laughable ignorance, Sol88 - it is (quite advanced) orbital mechanics that planets migrate backed with observational evidence.

planetary migration


Of course this ignorance of orbital mechanics is excusable in someone who does not know that 0.1 is less than 3.0
Open question for you, Sol88 (18th September 2014): is 0.1 less than 3.0?

Electric comets still do not exist! (26th August 2013)

And they would not interact electrically whatever first caused them to start migrating, RC??

 

[tusenfem]

I just saw on a WebEx session from ESAC a science talk from the Rosetta SWT meeting there, where they showed an OSIRIS image, with the water jets emanating from the surface, and the jets could be traced back to certain surface features.

 

[tusenfem]

Sol88, when can we expect the EC quantitative model for the production of two glasses of water per second from comet 67P/CG?

No matter which EC proponent I ask, I never get an answer.

 

[thedopefishlives]

Sol88, you never answered my post, I note. Surely you must have read it? I'm only a layperson and I expect an educated expert such as yourself must have answers for the points that I raised.

 

[tusenfem]

Just saw a spectrogram of ROSINA with a strong peak at 18 AMU (i.e. H2O water molecules) and only a slight blip at 17 and 16 AMU (i.e. OH and O)
Not only that, apparently they also measure H2(17)O and H2(18)O !!

 

[Dancing David]

Great pics, pity they look like they were taken with a 320x240 webcam!!!

but

http://planetary.s3.amazonaws.com/assets/images/9-small-bodies/2014/20140919_11.jpg looks like a bunny overexposed rocks, kinda like the deep impact bunnys overexposed rocks!!

http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2005/07/images/DeepImpactPIN.jpg

looks like a bunny

As usual you have no evidence of any electrical fields and discharges (to make a comet glow), despite all the devices on Rosetta.

I am beginning to consider that you are a troll with no desire to demonstrate that the electric comet theory has any merit whatsoever.

 

[Andy_Ross]

As usual you have no evidence of any electrical fields and discharges (to make a comet glow), despite all the devices on Rosetta.

I am beginning to consider that you are a troll with no desire to demonstrate that the electric comet theory has any merit whatsoever.

Wins a Cigar!

 

[Dancing David]

So what are the bright patches in your opinion, RC?

Are there any bright patches Rosetta has spotted?

So we are not back and forth over the same stopping grounds RC, lets come up with a list.

One list that are FACTS according to NASA and the ESA, the other that's still the standard list of EC PREDICTIONS.

THE FACTS (NASA,ESA)



1 Comets are in orbit around the Sun as are our planets.

2 Comets are composed of ices, dust and rocky debris carried from the early formation of the solar system about 4.5 billion years ago.

3 Comets are remnants from the cold, outer regions of the solar system. They are generally thought to come from two areas - the Oort Cloud and the Kuiper Belt. Both of these are areas where materials left over from the formation of our solar system have condensed into icy objects. Both regions extend beyond the orbits of Neptune and Pluto but are still part of our solar system and much closer to us than the closest star.

4 Comet orbits are elliptical. It brings them close to the sun and takes them far away.

5 Short period comets orbit the Sun every 20 years or less. Long period comets orbit the Sun every 200 years or longer. Those comets with orbits in between are called Halley-type comets.

6 Comets have three parts: the nucleus, the coma and the tails. The nucleus is the solid center component made of ice, gas and rocky debris. The coma is the gas and dust atmosphere around the nucleus, which results when heat from the Sun warms the surface of the nucleus so that gas and dust spew forth in all directions and are driven from the comet's surface. The tails are formed when energy from the Sun turns the coma so that it flows around the nucleus and forms a fanned out tail behind it extending millions of miles through space.

7 We see a comet's coma and tail because sunlight reflects off the dust (in the coma and dust tail) and because the energy from the Sun excites some molecules so that they glow and form a bluish tail called an ion tail and a yellow one made of neutral sodium atoms.

8 Scientists have seen comets range in size from less than 1 km diameter to as much as 300 km, although the 300km (called Chiron) does not travel into the inner solar system.

9 We know a comet could impact Earth and that it is important to understand the nature of comets so we can design better methods to protect ourselves from them should one be on a collision path with Earth.

10 A comet nucleus has a dark, sometimes mottled surface but we don't know if it has an outer crust or if it is layered inside. We don't really know what comets are like beneath their surface and that's why we need a mission like Deep Impact.

Sourel

Electric Comet Predictions

1 Comets are rock ( Same as asteroids)

2 MISSING WATER

3 SHARP SURFACE RELIEF

4 BLACK SURFACES

5 ANOMALOUS X-RAYS

6 ANOMALOUS DISCHARGE

7 COLLIMATED AND FILAMENTARY JETS

8 JET ENERGIES AND VELOCITIES

Source

Just for a start

So we know you can create copypasta, where is your data to support that

-comets are asteroids?
-that comets are not composed of volitiles that are commonly referred to as 'ice'. so is frozen ammonia an 'ice'?
-any evidence that there is an electrical discharge making a comet glow?

No you don't have that data, and just being able to copy and paste still won't do it.

As stated before Soll88 I am considering that you may just be a troll and that you lack the desire to show that the electric comet theory is correct.

The fact that you repeatedly present made up strawmen about the conventional comet theory is the most telling, in that you are NOT explaining how the electric cometr theory is correct.

For example, where in the actual mainstream scientific model of comets does its ay that they are not black?

To point this out I will ask you these simple question, which you will ignore as always.

What is a polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbon and what proportion of them is to be expected in a comet by mainstream theory?
What color is a polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbon?
What percentage of interstellar clouds that comets are formed from are polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons?

 

[Dancing David]

Just saw a spectrogram of ROSINA with a strong peak at 18 AMU (i.e. H2O water molecules) and only a slight blip at 17 and 16 AMU (i.e. OH and O)
Not only that, apparently they also measure H2(17)O and H2(18)O !!

Sol88 where are you?

 

[Dancing David]

I just saw on a WebEx session from ESAC a science talk from the Rosetta SWT meeting there, where they showed an OSIRIS image, with the water jets emanating from the surface, and the jets could be traced back to certain surface features.

Sol88, we all eagerly anticipate your well reasoned and original thoughts on this!

 

[Reality Check]

And they would not interact electrically whatever first caused them to start migrating, RC??

Obviously you have been spending to much time with the idiots at Thunderbolts who do not even know the density of comets and have been infected by their insane idea that everything is electromagnetic, Sol88 !

Maybe you know the density of comets though: Open question for you, Sol88 (18th September 2014): is 0.1 less than 3.0?

 

[Reality Check]

from your quote RC...blowing ice grains..the ICE you keep looking for!!!

And once again , Sol88: I, myself and me are not looking for ICE or IcE !!!

Astronomers have found lots of ice on comets - their density alone tells us that they have a large % of ices (no matter what the deluded people at Thunderbolts think).

And yes, Sol88 - scientists ask questions !

The implication of the smooth areas being created by ice grains is clear - it emphasizes the falseness of the Thunderbolts delusion that comets are rocks.

 

[Reality Check]

So we know you can create copypasta, where is your data to support that ...

Actually we have to thank Sol88 for that link to the Thunderbolts electric comet "model" because it shows the craziness that they are willing to believe in. The "model" is laughable that I will quote in in full:
Predictions on “Deep Impact”

Comets are debris produced during violent electrical interactions of planets and moons in an earlier phase of solar system history—a phase that persisted into early human history. Comets are similar to asteroids, and their composition varies. Most comets should be homogeneous—their interiors will have the same composition as their surfaces. They are simply “asteroids on eccentric orbits”.
• Comets follow their eccentric orbits within a weak electrical field centered on the Sun. They develop a charge imbalance with the higher voltage and charge density near the Sun that initiates discharge and the formation of a glowing plasma sheath—appearing as the coma and tail.
• The observed jets of comets are electric arc discharges to the nucleus, producing “electrical discharge machining” (EDM) of the surface. The excavated material is accelerated into space along the jets’ observed filamentary arcs.
• Intermittent and wandering arcs erode the surface and burn it black, leaving the distinctive scarring patterns of electric discharge. The primary distinction between a comet and an asteroid is that, due to its elliptical orbit, electrical arcing and “electrostatic cleaning” will clean the nucleus’ surface, leaving little or no dust or debris on it.

Note the last point and the ignorance that both asteroids and comets have elliptical orbits !

This web page was written on Jul 04, 2005, just before Deep Impact and lead to lies about their predictions being conformed: The lies, failures and successes of Thunderbolts Deep Impact predictions.

And: [/B], from 7th August 2009:Comets have measured densities that are much less than that of rocks (asteroids).
Sol88 has been in denial of the science since from basically the beginning of the thread on 6th July 2009: Electric comets still do not exist! (26th August 2013)
Thunderbolts have been in denial for over 9 years!

 

[Sol88]

I just saw on a WebEx session from ESAC a science talk from the Rosetta SWT meeting there, where they showed an OSIRIS image, with the water jets emanating from the surface, and the jets could be traced back to certain surface features.

We can the sheeple see the image?