Oh look, more classic pseudo science behaviour. Lets ignore the fact that my entire theory is baseless and focus on a small and obsucre detail that, when taken out of context and ignoring to already given explanations, might contain some words that I like.
There are electrons and protons moving trough ALL of space. We've been observing them for decades.
Never have any of the massive electrical fields needed for the EC theory to be true detected.
Therefore EC and EU are fantasy. And while they are entertaining fantasy, they have no place in science.
*unless* of course you can explain the clear contradiction between your theory and even the simplest empirical data. But rather than do that you try to distract with minutiae.
The irony being the mention of the diamagnetic cavity. Its existence, confirmed in artificial comet experiments in 1984-5, and also in-situ at 1P/Halley, tells us, definitively, that the solar wind is not reaching the nucleus. Other observations also support this at 67P, but the essential fact is that we knew this in the mid-80s. And it was predicted in the 60s (iirc).
The ironic part is that the genius Thornhill, in 2006, has some sort of electric woo (EDM?) producing undetectable O
- ions from the surface, which combine with H
+ from the solar wind to create OH, which dumb scientists mistake as a breakdown product of water vapour, despite multiple definitive detections of water at comets from 1986 - 2006.
Of course, the total lack of a magnetic signature within the cavity rather kicks this EDM up the Khyber! Not to mention that the water (that isn't there, according to Thornhill, or is created by the non-existent O
- combining twice with H
+ from the solar wind, according to others) is detected within the cavity, where the solar wind isn't reaching!
If I was an EU wooist, I would steer well clear of the diamagnetic cavity. It is a perfect example of how appallingly unscientific this electric comet lark is!