The Electric Comet theory

[Lukraak_Sisser]

Sol88, why are you so happy there is rock there?
It does nothing to dispel the mainstream view of comets (remnants of the early solar system, which would contain rock), all it might do is a small revision of how the components are organized.

On the other hand, rock is a mineral. Aka a salt. And all salts are electrical insulators. In other words, a comet composed of a rocky exterior is even LESS likely to be electrically charged than one with an icy exterior.

And I find it a bit sad that neither you nor haig have even tried to calculate the energy needed to create a lightning bolt trough several millions of kilometers of vacuum.
It starts to make me wonder if the proponents of an electric comet/universe have ever actually worked with electricity beyond some dabbling with simple ciruit boards.

 

[Ziggurat]

Lets again have a discussion about fluffy bunnies (Looking at pictures)

lets look at this beauty http://d1jqu7g1y74ds1.cloudfront.net/wp-content/uploads/2014/11/Philae-Nov13-huge.jpg Credit: ESA/Rosetta/Philae/CIVA

Mmmm.....looks like rock....melted rock!!!

Mmmmm.... looks like brownie.... freshly cooked and crumbling brownie!!!

Oh my god, comets are made of brownies!! The solar system is a giant Easy-Bake^TM oven!

 

[Jrrarglblarg]

Mmmmm.... looks like brownie.... freshly cooked and crumbling brownie!!!

Oh my god, comets are made of brownies!! The solar system is a giant Easy-Bake^TM oven!

An ambient temperature just over absolute zero, cooking times in the millions of years. . . Yeah, that's a valid comparison.

 

[Dancing David]

Interesting to note Philae recorded three touch down times, ie it bounced twice.

Still unsure if the harpoons fired or not?





Maybe the harpoons and Philae bounced off this rock stuff they talk about. So both the thruster failed and harpoons failed to anchor.

Still a brilliant achievement and fascinating science.

Funny how you ignore the first set of press releases and the subsequent ones where they say 'the harpoons did not fire'.

Are you familiar with snow in any way, do you know what a plow wall is?

 

[Dancing David]

I see the mainstreamer's getting a little antsy

pln2bz, welcome aboard!

As you've picked up Reality Check thinks comets are NOT rock and Dancing David is under the wrong impression the comet nucleus glows. So I'm not 100% sure they actually understand the Electric comet theory and it's funny (if it was not so serious) to see them squirm and act "surprised"

I see you still have yet to present any data that supports your theory Sol88, I don't think you understand the EC theory.

Why don't Apollo objects have comas?

 

[Dancing David]

Lets again have a discussion about fluffy bunnies (Looking at pictures)

lets look at this beauty http://d1jqu7g1y74ds1.cloudfront.net/wp-content/uploads/2014/11/Philae-Nov13-huge.jpg Credit: ESA/Rosetta/Philae/CIVA

Mmmm.....looks like rock....melted rock!!!

Looks indeterminate, I suppose you have nothing like data to sugegst there are actually these charge differentials that make comets glow, you know actual data that supports teh actual EC theory?

 

[Dancing David]

but we have no substantial ice's AT ALL

So now revise the dirtysnowall model DD!!!

Whats a comet now then??

Says who, exactly where and when Sol88, otherwise I shall call you our for just making it up.

Who said where and when that there is no ice?

 

[Dancing David]

My bolding, we did??? Reality Check your a tripper

Exposed Water Ice Deposits on the Surface of Comet 9P/Tempel 1




You say we did find substantial water ice on the surface, the peer reviewed paper says we didn't....who's right Reality Check???

Seems the shoe is on the other foot, eh Reality Check!

Seems you can't even read your own quote

"The total area of exposed water ice is substantially less than that required to support the observed ambient outgassing from the comet, which likely has additional source regions below the surface."

Where did the mainstream says that all ice must be on the surface?

 

[Dancing David]

So no ice on top (all comets visited) and no ice below(Temple 1) so where could the ice be???? as Reality check pointed out we can see the gases so where's the ice???

Where is that alleged evidence that there is no ice underneath.

Funny how you have not cited the actual source that says that.

 

[Sol88]

Lukraak_Sisser, just a rebrief on the thread to date...

Reality Check as been jamm'n this down my throat since we started, so to me I'm more happy to see solid rock and NOT a FluffyDirtySnowball

Just say'n

It cannot be made of solid rock (obvious to a child) and so is not an asteroid.
It is lighter than water and so it is not a solid mass of ice.
What is left oh great genius Sol88 ?

Your fails are getting more epic so: EPIC FAIL !

ETA: Hint: Read the citation [5] and porosity.
Hint 2: What is the density of snow?

 

[Sol88]

I mean

Better question, what is the standard model?

Is it a dirtyiceball? icydirtball, dirtysnowball, icedirtysnowball or what?



but my mate wiki said,

but my mate wiki said,

Quote:
Debate over comet composition
Comet Borrelly exhibits jets, yet is hot and dry.

Debate continues about how much ice is in a comet. In 2001, NASA's Deep Space 1 team, working at NASA's Jet Propulsion Lab, obtained high-resolution images of the surface of Comet Borrelly. They announced that comet Borrelly exhibits distinct jets, yet has a hot, dry surface. The assumption that comets contain water and other ices led Dr. Laurence Soderblom of the U.S. Geological Survey to say, "The spectrum suggests that the surface is hot and dry. It is surprising that we saw no traces of water ice." However, he goes on to suggest that the ice is probably hidden below the crust as "either the surface has been dried out by solar heating and maturation or perhaps the very dark soot-like material that covers Borrelly's surface masks any trace of surface ice".[59]

The recent Deep Impact probe has also yielded results suggesting that the majority of a comet's water ice is below the surface, and that these reservoirs feed the jets of vaporised water that form the coma of Tempel 1.[60]

However, more recent data from the Stardust mission show that materials retrieved from the tail of comet Wild 2 were crystalline and could only have been "born in fire."[61][62] More recent still, the materials retrieved demonstrate that the "comet dust resembles asteroid materials."[63] These new results have forced scientists to rethink the nature of comets and their distinction from asteroids.[64]

LINK
How many times Reality check, Tim Thompson, how many times are you presented with data that is not compatible without MAJOR assumptions, ice below the surface, comet migration to explain the high temp minerals et cetera before the model is abandoned for a model that PREDICTED some of the major phenomena!

Charge separation is happening before your very eyes, so wake up and smell the roses!

Following the latest data what would more corectly describe the composition of a comet neucleus now DD,RC et al?

Is it a dirtyiceball? icydirtball, dirtysnowball, icedirtysnowball or what?

 

[Sol88]

Says who, exactly where and when Sol88, otherwise I shall call you our for just making it up.

Who said where and when that there is no ice?

DD, please see link in post above,

The surface of the nucleus is generally dry, dusty or rocky, suggesting that the ices are hidden beneath a surface crust several metres thick.

Comet Borrelly exhibits jets, but has no surface ice.

Deep Impact was a NASA space probe launched from Cape Canaveral Air Force Station at 18:47 UTC on January 12, 2005.[3] It was designed to study the interior composition of the comet Tempel 1 (9P/Tempel), by releasing an impactor into the comet. At 05:52 UTC on July 4, 2005, the impactor successfully collided with the comet's nucleus. The impact excavated debris from the interior of the nucleus, forming an impact crater. Photographs taken by the spacecraft showed the comet to be more dusty and less icy than had been expected. The impact generated an unexpectedly large and bright dust cloud, obscuring the view of the impact crater.

LINK


A lot of people have said it get with thr program NO SUFFCIENT ICE's OBSERVED ON AND BELOW THE COMET NEUCLEUS TO ACCOUNT FOR THE OBSERVED OUT GASSING.

fair call?

But the gases are there none the less!

 

[Lukraak_Sisser]

Lukraak_Sisser, just a rebrief on the thread to date...

Reality Check as been jamm'n this down my throat since we started, so to me I'm more happy to see solid rock and NOT a FluffyDirtySnowball

Just say'n

You are aware that it is possible for a surface to be a relatively thin crust over different materials?

The expulsion jets have been visible on pictures for quite some time already and they behave nothing like electricity and everything like vapor.

 

[rwguinn]

If there was ice on the comet, there would be a hockey team. No hockey, no Ice.

 

[Haig]

Funny how you ignore the first set of press releases and the subsequent ones where they say 'the harpoons did not fire'.

Nope, not ignore but just inquiring if it is known "why" the anchoring system failed to do it's job. We can often learn a lot in failures.

Are you familiar with snow in any way, do you know what a plow wall is?

Sure, are you suggesting snow ploughs are on the comet?

One of the experts (at least) admits his surprise in the surface material and it's apparent properties ... Wonder what this "shiny stuff" could be and how it could come to be on a "Dirty Snowball" comet? Lots more interesting "stuff" to come I expect!

His colleague explains a bit more: “The rebound of the lander is an indication of a higher strength material, and that was a surprise to us. … So we have seen a variety of surfaces, a snow field of soft stuff, and this rocky field of rock stuff, which could be a [stronger material], and we also see this shiny stuff,” which he says could also be a stronger material.

http://www.theguardian.com/science/...mission-philae-lander-live-coverage-comet-esa

 

[Haig]

I mean




Following the latest data what would more corectly describe the composition of a comet neucleus now DD,RC et al?

Is it a dirtyiceball? icydirtball, dirtysnowball, icedirtysnowball or what?

By the look of the Philae picture on APOD it could be called "blackpartmeltedrock"
http://apod.nasa.gov/apod/image/1411/Welcome_to_a_comet.jpg

That sure looks like cracked rock and the part in the middle of the picture has a melted shiny look.

Wonder if they detected electromagnetic effects and charge on it? aka an Electric Comet

 

[Jrrarglblarg]

I'm impressed by the depth of interpretation haig and sol88 have presented of a single black and white photograph. I've studied more than my share of geology and I'm unable to identify the substances and materials pictured other than "lander " and "not the lander." Maybe one of you could outline the criteria used so the rest of us can join you in reaching premature certainty with insufficient data, because I for one don't know how to do that.

 

[tusenfem]

i am sure i saw some fossils in the rock next to philae

romap has loads of magnetc and plasma data, now we need to plow through it, but not at the moment
, i am on vacation

and mupus drilled into the surface, data coming soon on the tensile strength (or maybe already something mentioned on twitter)

 

[Sol88]

i am sure i saw some fossils in the rock next to philae

romap has loads of magnetc and plasma data, now we need to plow through it, but not at the moment
, i am on vacation

and mupus drilled into the surface, data coming soon on the tensile strength (or maybe already something mentioned on twitter)

Question is though, if it says the tensile strength is very similar to ROCK, are we going to beleive it this time


Anymore on those "certain features" the jets were eminating from, Tusenfem?

 

[Sol88]

Oh...I see why everyones gone quite now!