As promised, a look at the four cited papers.
My perspective is this: sitting here on Earth, or above it with x-ray telescopes and such, all we know about comets is what we see from a distance (and the same is true for most of the solar system). There have been some space-probes that got up close and personal with some comets, I'm going to leave the data which has come back from them to one side, for now.
So, how does Siggy_G's post stack up when viewed through the lens of astronomical observations?
And how well do the four papers cited support the case he makes?
Comets:
Even with the application of conventional physics/notions, it should be evident that comets inhabit very strong electric properties.
Imagine a comet in its orbit approaching the Sun. As the comet nucleus is exposed to radiation from the Sun, it will emit electrons due to the photoelectric effect. Especially so, if the material is of a rocky or partially metallic substance. Electrons will bind with positive ions in the solar wind and build up a comet coma. The recombinations will cause radiation in various bandwidth, depending on ion types and energy states.
The escalating exposure to radiation as the comet orbits towards the Sun, will increase the photoelectric effect. The comet's shadow side, is still exposed to protons from cosmic radiation. This will cause instabilities in the coma plasma as it partially emits electrons and partially receives protons. Electric discharges will occur within the coma (probably more so at the day/night border), which will cause x-ray emissions.
Since a portion of the coma also consists of neutral atoms, these will also respond to the radiation towards excited states and/or emitting electrons. The comet nucleus will build up a positive net charge on the Sun side, while the coma will be a non-equilibrium plasma. Dust will be charged and repel itself off the surface and manifest as the dusty plasma tail that moves in a more mechanical manner (appearing to lag behind) than the pure plasma tail that responds directly to rays from the Sun and solar wind (anti-sunward tail).
If there is any net charge difference between the comet and the Sun, it would have an additional electromagnetic influence on its orbit, which would mean that mass (and density) derived from orbital speed from gravity formulas would give wrong results.
While the above are my own words, these are relevant abstracts/papers in terms of what is observed (and possible interpretations):
X-ray and ultraviolet emissions from Comet C/Hyakutake 1996 B2
Possible Mechanism of Cometary Outbursts
On the electrostatic charging of the cometary nucleus
The Electrostatic (...) Variations and Outbursts of Brightness of Comets
As far as I can tell, the observational implications of Siggy_G's post are as follows (summary):
-> comet comas will emit x-rays, especially at their terminators
-> comets have two tails, a "dusty plasma" tail, and a "pure plasma" tail; the two types of tails will point in different directions
-> comet orbits will be unusual (anomalous).
With the possible exception of the comet tails, Siggy_G's observables are entirely qualitative; there is nothing about the expected intensity, time-variability, or spectrum of the predicted x-rays, for example, nor any hint of what the expected orbital anomalies should be.
This, IMHO, makes what Siggy_G has written non-science; there is no objective, independently verifiable way to test any of these ideas.
Further, there is no way to take what Siggy_G has written and develop quantitative predictions; the descriptions of all the physical processes which lead to the observables are purely qualitative, and no direct references are provided for an interested reader to find any such more detailed write-ups.
Turning to the cited papers^.
The first thing to note is that none of them refers to discharges within the coma (the second paper covers discharges "
in the sub-surface region of a cometary nucleus").
Second, none of the papers refers to the appearance of a dusty plasma tail (the last paper covers fine dust that could "
electrostatically levitate over the nucleus" and subsequently produce "
Outbursts of Brightness of Comets at Large Heliocentric Distances")
Third, the comet charging mechanisms discussed/presented in the papers bear little resemblance to those in Siggy_G's post (this probably merits a long post of its own), other than at a highly superficial level. For example, the third paper is about charging mechanisms for comets at distances of >~5 au (from the Sun), and focuses on direct solar wind-nucleus interactions; the photoelectric effect is barely even referred to.
Fourth, the observed x-ray emission seems inconsistent with Siggy-G's idea (discharges); the first paper's abstract^ refers to "
A slowly varying emission and a large impulsive event that varied on time scales of 1 to 2 hours were observed", which seems to be quite un-discharge like.
Siggy_G said:
The thread also included advices to EU proponents, involving themselves in various discussions, that one ought to have references to papers or peer reviewed material, supporting one's statements.
I recently found a paper that I think EU proponents will be including in all their "
references to papers or peer reviewed material, supporting [their] statements", and I'm wondering how long ite will be before it starts to appear. Non-EU fans reading this post may PM me if you'd like a heads-up.
^
caveat: I have been unable to obtain a copy of the first paper
.
Among other things, you overestimate how much any of us care about them.
!
