The Electric Comet theory

[ben m]

No, there was no emission of any kind prior to the actual impact. There was an initial relatively faint flash, followed by a second bright flash 0.124 seconds later. The initial faint flash was in fact the actual impact, and not a flash prior to actual impact.

...


The brightness comes from sunlight reflected off of highly reflective material underneath the relatively dark surface.

My mental picture is something like this:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RV8MF-440xg

This is video of a torpedo being tested on a warship. The single "impact" makes two distinct flashes of brightness. First, there's sort of a whump corresponding to the explosion itself (or the shock wave or something) making the water whiten (and the destroyer lift up a bit). Then, later, there's a big spray as lots of material finds its way into the air.

Neither of these brightening events involves, say, the water emitting white-hot blackbody radiation. It's just a big cloud of reflective droplets getting spit out in front of your otherwise-dark surface.

And the two "brightenings" does not mean there were two explosions. There was one explosion having different effects on different parts of its target.

 

[Sol88]

The brightness comes from sunlight reflected off of highly reflective material underneath the relatively dark surface. That's why the initial plume is faint, the surface is dark. Once the bright material underneath is liberated, which takes about 0.1 seconds, reflected sunlight saturates the detector. Your assumption that some extraordinary "energy" is involved is a serious mis-interpretation of what is actually happening. The brightness is purely reflected sunlight and nothing more than that. The saturation is strictly a consequence of the sensitivity setting of the detector. The plume in reality may have not looked bright to a human eye at all, but will have looked very bright to a detector set to a very low threshold. Without knowing exactly how sensitive the detector was, there is no way to judge the true brightness of the flashes.

Do you think the bright spot on Hartly 2 are patches of ice then?

image Credit: NASA

And the jets are gas being released from deeper under the surface yeah? As per mainstream thinking.

Wrong on two counts. First, NASA did not make any predictions; scientists who publish predictions, even if funded by NASA, never speak for NASA. The organization, NASA, never made any predictions. Groups or individual scientists did, but all of their published predictions were fairly general, "order of magnitude" statements, and mostly explicitly model dependent. However, none of the actual Deep Impact results were in any way "wildly" inconsistent with the published predictions.

Wal Thornhill DID, N.A.S.A did NOT!

Advance flash
Thornhill: Electrical interactions with Deep Impact may be slight, but they should be measurable if NASA will look for them. They would likely be similar to those of Comet Shoemaker-Levy 9 prior to striking Jupiter's atmosphere: The most obvious would be a flash (lightning-like discharge) shortly before impact.
see [ 2005 July 03]

Result
What you see is something really surprising. First, there is a small flash, then there's a delay, then there's a big flash and the whole thing breaks loose.
see [ 2005 July 07]

LINK

The copper projectile did not have explosives in it did it? I can see how a missile or bomb might make two flashes, first the missile/bomb hits the surface then the explosives detonate.

Nuff said!

If they predicted a flash before contact then that prediction was a failure, as there was no flash before contact.

Two flashes predicted two happened, seems your hang up on when they happend, prediction was for two and two there were!!
oh and that the impact would be more energetic than expected!

High-energy explosion
Thornhill: The energetic effects of the encounter should exceed that of a simple physical impact, in the same way that was seen with comet Shoemaker-Levy 9 at Jupiter.
see [ 2001 Oct 18]
Result
It is now well documented that every scientist associated with the project was stunned by the energetic outburst.
see [ 2005 July 07]

link above

 

[Sol88]

What about Enceladus's jets?

Credit Cassini

full res here http://www.ciclops.org/view_media.php?id=29984

Or are those bright spot reflected sunlight as well?

I stunned that mainstream just make ***** up, anything to save your job I 'spose!

 

[Perpetual Student]

Will this

stuff


never end?

 

[DeiRenDopa]

Will this


[qimg]http://joanharvest.files.wordpress.com/2008/10/crackpot3.gif?w=256&h=256[/qimg]stuff


never end?

Let me guess: Sol88 did not respond to ben m's post providing exactly the explanation he (Sol88) asked for? Instead, Sol88's post(s) continue to clearly display not only gross ignorance, but one may infer that he is actually still very proud of his ignorance?

Can any active participant in this thread explain why some folk seem to be so proud of their ignorance? And seem not the least bit interested in actually learning the basics of astronomy, physics, etc necessary to understand even the data returned by spacecraft such as Cassini (let alone how that data can be analysed)?

 

[Reality Check]

Wal Thornhill DID, N.A.S.A did NOT!

Wal Thornhill DID, N.A.S.A LIES ABOUT THE IMPACT!
I have fixed his quote with some emphasis for the really, really gulible.

Advance flash
Thornhill: Electrical interactions with Deep Impact may be slight, but they should be measurable if NASA will look for them. They would likely be similar to those of Comet Shoemaker-Levy 9 prior to striking Jupiter's atmosphere: The most obvious would be a flash (lightning-like discharge) shortly before impact.

Result
What you see is something really surprising. First, there is a small flash on or after impact, then there's a delay, then there's a big flash and the whole thing breaks loose.

(emphasis and addition)

Two flashes predicted two happened, seems your hang up on when they happend, prediction was for two and two there were!!

Learn to read. Sol88
The prediciton was for 2 flashes, one shortly before impact.
Only an idiot would believe Wal Thornhill's lie about the prediction.
His prediction: a flash shortly before impact.
The result : a flash on or after impact.
This is almost worthy of the The totally stupid electric comet idea debunked! list, e.g. in an EC proponent lie section.

oh and that the impact would be more energetic than expected!

oh and another prediction where Wal Thornhill DID, N.A.S.A LIES ABOUT THE IMPACT!.

Where are the measurements of the Tempel 1 impact exceeding the expected energy?
​

Answered in the post since you are too lazy or gullible to look it up yourself:

• Prediction: 19 Gigajoules
• Result: 16.5 (+9.1/−4.1) GJ which includes 19 GJ

it will be added to the The totally stupid electric comet idea debunked! list real soon now). Thanks Sol88 once again.

You really are gullible to be taken in by that deluded book advertisement web site, Sol88. Try thinking for yourself for once.

The totally stupid electric comet idea debunked!
Nuff said! ​

​

 

[Reality Check]

What about Enceladus's jets?
...snipped Sol88 inane rant...

They are jets.

 

[dafydd]

It amuses me to think that Sol88 thinks that he knows more about this that the scientists who actually study this subject.Where did you study Sol?

 

[Haig]

Solar flux tubes are solar magnetic flux tubes.

Haven’t had time to come back into this thread yet but I will try to give it more thought soon. Just had to post this for now.

Anyone read this paper in full? In the abstract magnetic energy stored in the corona via reconnection is dismissed. Seems like EU/PC concepts are coming more into the mainstream and this, indirectly, supports the electric comet idea – discuss please.

Physics of Solar Coronal Mass Ejections [QUOTE]The traditional models, which envision releasing magnetic energy stored in the corona via reconnection (accomplished by specified and/or numerical dissipation in these models), have not produced quantitative agreement with the observed CME acceleration and propagation to 1 AU. In this talk, I will present a new concept that does not require reconnection and yields model CME dynamics in good quantitative agreement with data. The underlying magnetic structure is a flux rope, and the basic driving force is the toroidal Lorentz hoop force acting on a flux rope with two legs anchored in the Sun. The force equations were originally derived for axisymmetric toroidal tokamak equilibria by Shafranov, but the basic physics can be adapted to the dynamics of nonaxisymmetric solar flux ropes. The initial flux rope is driven out of equilibrium by increasing its poloidal flux. The calculated acceleration and subsequent propagation of model CMEs have been shown to correctly replicate the observed CME dynamics from the Sun to 1 AU, with the computed plasma and magnetic field parameters at 1 AU in close agreement with the in situ SW data. The increasing poloidal flux produces an electromotive force (EMF) that is sufficient to accelerate particles to X-ray energies. The predicted temporal profile of the EMF given by the best-fit solution to the observed CME trajectory is found to closely coincide with that of the observed associated solar flare X-ray intensity. [/QUOTE]

 

[Reality Check]

Haven’t had time to come back into this thread yet but I will try to give it more thought soon. Just had to post this for now.

Anyone read this paper in full? In the abstract magnetic energy stored in the corona via reconnection is dismissed. Seems like EU/PC concepts are coming more into the mainstream and this, indirectly, supports the electric comet idea – discuss please.

Physics of Solar Coronal Mass Ejections [

Nothing to do with this thread but...
The current "EU/PC concepts" have never been and never will be a part of mainstream physics because (as this and other threads show) they are a bunch of crackpot ideas only believed in by the gullible.

The electric comet idea is a fantasy as shown in my post The totally stupid electric comet idea debunked!

It takes real ignorance to be unable to grasp that the measured density of comet nuclei is ~0.6 g/cc, the measured density of asteroids is ~3.0 g/cc and that 0.6 is less than 3.0. See Comets have meaured densities that are much less than that of rocks (asteroids).

The abstract you quote does have anything to do with any "EU/PC concepts". It looks like standard electromagnetism.

 

[Reality Check]

Just had to post this now (jjust as much as a derail as Haigs):
James Chen has a couple of other papers on CME, e.g.
Dynamics of Solar Coronal Mass Ejections: Theory and New SECCHI Observation
2009

The physical mechanisms of coronal mass ejections (CMEs) and flares have been an important open question in solar and by implication stellar physics. The physical connections between CMEs and these phenomena have also been a major question. The new SECCHI observations represent unprecedented opportunities to test and establish new understanding of CME physics both closer to and farther away from the Sun than was previously possible. In this paper, I will discuss new results from recent applications of a theoretical flux-rope model of CMEs (Chen JGR, 1996) to several CMEs and their dynamics observed to about 100 Rs (1/2 AU) by SECCHI. Forces acting on these CMEs are found to be dominated by the Lorentz hoop force in the inner corona and by the competition of the hoop force and retarding drag force in the outer corona and heliosphere. It is shown that the erupting flux-rope model governed by these forces is able to fit the observed CME trajectories throughout the SECCHI field of view out to approximately 1/2 AU, indicating that the model correctly captures the basic physics, i.e., forces and magnetic geometry, of acceleration and propagation of CMEs. It is also shown that the duration of the poloidal flux injection function chosen to fit the CME trajectory closely match the duration of the observed GOES X-ray light curves for both short-duration and long-duration flares.

Hmmm... EU/PC is not mentioned. I wonder why!

 

[Haig]

The abstract you quote does have anything to do with any "EU/PC concepts". It looks like standard electromagnetism

Ah! So RC you dismiss this paper without even reading it? This will seem like EU/PC stuff to many. Also, It’s not really a derail, as electric comets require the Sun to have an electric field to behave as they do.

The abstract

The increasing poloidal flux produces an electromotive force (EMF) that is sufficient to accelerate particles to X-ray energies. The predicted temporal profile of the EMF given by the best-fit solution to the observed CME trajectory is found to closely coincide with that of the observed associated solar flare X-ray intensity.

BTW what is “standard electromagnetism” to you, in the context of this topic?

 

[tusenfem]

Haven’t had time to come back into this thread yet but I will try to give it more thought soon. Just had to post this for now.

Anyone read this paper in full? In the abstract magnetic energy stored in the corona via reconnection is dismissed. Seems like EU/PC concepts are coming more into the mainstream and this, indirectly, supports the electric comet idea – discuss please.

Probably not, because it is an abstract for a talk at the 52nd annual meeting of the APS. Although there seems to be a paper about it too. (tho I have no access) He seems to use a force driving out the flux rope, which may model the observations for travel time and structure at Earth pretty well, but how does it fit with what is observed on the sun?

If you want to study this (but not in this thread) then you should read the papers by Christan Möstl 2009 and 2009 and by Marianne Temmer 2010 and references therein.

Note, however, that all these papers have nothing to do with the EU/PU/PC/ES/EC hypotheses in which not even the proponents can come to a coherent model of even the basics (see the pen-ultimate example the iron sun).

 

[Dancing David]

Haven’t had time to come back into this thread yet but I will try to give it more thought soon. Just had to post this for now.

Anyone read this paper in full? In the abstract magnetic energy stored in the corona via reconnection is dismissed. Seems like EU/PC concepts are coming more into the mainstream and this, indirectly, supports the electric comet idea – discuss please.

Physics of Solar Coronal Mass Ejections [QUOTE]The traditional models, which envision releasing magnetic energy stored in the corona via reconnection (accomplished by specified and/or numerical dissipation in these models), have not produced quantitative agreement with the observed CME acceleration and propagation to 1 AU. In this talk, I will present a new concept that does not require reconnection and yields model CME dynamics in good quantitative agreement with data. The underlying magnetic structure is a flux rope, and the basic driving force is the toroidal Lorentz hoop force acting on a flux rope with two legs anchored in the Sun. The force equations were originally derived for axisymmetric toroidal tokamak equilibria by Shafranov, but the basic physics can be adapted to the dynamics of nonaxisymmetric solar flux ropes. The initial flux rope is driven out of equilibrium by increasing its poloidal flux. The calculated acceleration and subsequent propagation of model CMEs have been shown to correctly replicate the observed CME dynamics from the Sun to 1 AU, with the computed plasma and magnetic field parameters at 1 AU in close agreement with the in situ SW data. The increasing poloidal flux produces an electromotive force (EMF) that is sufficient to accelerate particles to X-ray energies. The predicted temporal profile of the EMF given by the best-fit solution to the observed CME trajectory is found to closely coincide with that of the observed associated solar flare X-ray intensity.

[/QUOTE]

Hi Haig,

Just a post and run, considering you just dropped some random but here the only answer is : no.

It does not support the EC theory at all.

 

[Dancing David]

Ah! So RC you dismiss this paper without even reading it? This will seem like EU/PC stuff to many. Also, It’s not really a derail, as electric comets require the Sun to have an electric field to behave as they do.

False dichotomy and overgeneralization.

The sun is well know to have a magnetic field and there are times that other things happen with the solar wind and like. What strength is the 'electric field' of the sun Haig?

The electric comet theory is still wrong.

Where does the charge on the comet come from Haig?

 

[Reality Check]

Ah! So RC you dismiss this paper without even reading it? This will seem like EU/PC stuff to many. Also, It’s not really a derail, as electric comets require the Sun to have an electric field to behave as they do.

Ah! So Haig you think this paper has any EU/PC non-science in it without even reading it?
Only someone totally taken in by the EU/PC non-science would think that that abstract has anything to do with it. It is obviously abut solar magnetic flux ropes and the toroidal Lorentz hoop forces on them.
There is also the well known mainstream acceleration of particles by the magnetic fields (producing X-rays).

But I do see where you got the idea that it does - there is a Thunderbolts forum post mentioning the paper. The author merely quotes the abstract and underlines that the paper is an alternative electromagnetic explanation to the magnetic reconnection theory.

The electric comet idea is a fantasy as shown in my post The totally stupid electric comet idea debunked!

I hope that you are not one of the ignorant people that do not know the 0.6 is less that 3.0.

The abstract
BTW what is “standard electromagnetism” to you, in the context of this topic?

The application of the laws of electromagnetism (e.g. Maxwell's eqiuations) to physical situations.

 

[Perpetual Student]

To those who fight the never ending battle against crackpots like Sol88, Mozina, etc.:

Your patience and endurance are admirable. Without your efforts these people would likely influence some of the uninformed audience to believe their nonsense. The more the lay public understands the nature of true science, the better off is our whole society.
Thank you for your contributions to this forum.

 

[DeiRenDopa]

Ah! So RC you dismiss this paper without even reading it? This will seem like EU/PC stuff to many.

Why?

Also, It’s not really a derail, as electric comets require the Sun to have an electric field to behave as they do.

[...]

What, quantitatively, is the nature of the Sun's electric field, sufficient and necessary for the electric comet idea to be consistent with all the relevant observations (of comets)?

 

[Haig]

False dichotomy and overgeneralization.

Hi again DD, I really haven’t the time for this just now, but what the heck….
Don’t agree. I only see two choices: the mainstream “dirty snowball” from the Oort Cloud or the EU/PC Electric Comet theory. Are there any others?

As for overgeneralization ….. Well what do you expect from a layman ;-)

The sun is well know to have a magnetic field and there are times that other things happen with the solar wind and like

As I understand it magnetism and electricity are very closely connected.

A magnetic field is a field of force produced by moving electric charges, by electric fields that vary in time ~ snip~
In electromagnetism, magnetic fields are intimately related to electric fields; a changing magnetic field generates an electric field and a changing electric field produces a magnetic field.

What strength is the 'electric field' of the sun Haig?

From what I have read, the best way to measure the strength of the electric field of the Sun is to measure the acceleration it produces. You know - the million miles an hour solar wind that sometimes virtually stops. BTW can you explain that? And how, in the first place, matter is being accelerated away from the strongest gravity around here?

The electric comet theory is still wrong.

So you prefer the Snowball Comet from the Oort Cloud and you think that's right?

Where does the charge on the comet come from Haig?

As I understand the electric comet theory:

Any comet in a plasma (the heliosphere) tends to acquire a net negative charge, particularly long period ones that spend a long time far out in the solar system..

As the comet, on a hugely eccentric orbit, comes in on close approach it is exposed to a strengthening plasma density and electric field from the Sun which is inclined to give a positive charge. This difference in charge sets up a Langmuir Sheath or plasma double layer and this forms the coma and tail and the comet becomes visible in a glow discharge.

However these examples from Thunderbolt put across the idea much better than I can:-

Electric Comets Re-write Space Science
Plasma Discharge Model
Comet Holmes In The Electric Universe

All the above findings pose enormous problems for the "dirty snowball" model; all are predictable features of the electric model.

Edited by jhunter1163: 

Do not post large blocks of text from other sites. Links are sufficient.

 

[ben m]

From what I have read, the best way to measure the strength of the electric field of the Sun is to measure the acceleration it produces. You know - the million miles an hour solar wind that sometimes virtually stops.

Ah, yes. Let's use the Solar Wind to measure the Sun's electric fields, eh? Half of the solar wind consists of 1 keV electrons--negatively charged particles---telling us that the Sun's electric field points INWARDS and integrates to -1 kilovolt. Half of the solar wind consists of 1 keV protons---positively charged particles---telling us that the Sun's electric field points OUTWARDS and integrates to +1 kilovolt.

Is the Sun's radial electric field simultaneously +1 kV and -1 kV? No it's not. The solar wind is not accelerated by an electric field.

By the way, the rest of your EU/PC colleagues (Zeuzzz, Mozina, etc.) always argue that the Sun's electric potential is *gazillions of volts*, and that to get this number you have to *ignore* the energies of the solar wind. You're telling us the opposite.

Any comet in a plasma (the heliosphere) tends to acquire a net negative charge, particularly long period ones that spend a long time far out in the solar system..

How big a charge, Haig? My calculations showed that a charged-up comet (even if that actually happens) has only a few kilojoules of electrical energy.

As the comet, on a hugely eccentric orbit, comes in on close approach it is exposed to a strengthening plasma density and electric field from the Sun which is inclined to give a positive charge. This difference in charge sets up a Langmuir Sheath or plasma double layer and this forms the coma and tail and the comet becomes visible in a glow discharge.

a) There's no such thing as a glow discharge in a plasma. Glow discharges are characteristic of insulators.

b) Comets don't have a glow-discharge spectrum (carbon/oxygen/metal atomic emission lines), they have a reflected-sunlight spectrum (blackbody with solar absorption lines).

c) The "discharge" and "double layer" and whatnot, only has a kilojoule's worth of energy to get rid of. That kilojoule wouldn't be visible from Earth unless it was used to power a laser beam aimed directly at Earth.