Continuation The Electric Comet Theory Boogaloo (Part 2)

[Sol88]

More than 1 "boundry layer" old chap, all dynamic, all helping the nucleus accommodate the solar plasma environment around it at that time and location in space.

Hint...Has something to do with
Surface charging and electrostatic dust acceleration at the nucleus of comet 67P during periods of low activity

Though the title may need amending.

Tusenfem?

 

[Sol88]

Sniped

And I'm not reading a piece from a woo site, when we have an in-house PA who did his PhD on double layers!

snip

Jonesdave116?

Jonesdave116, could there be double layers?

Should we ask Tusenfem to clarify and set us both straight?

 

[jonesdave116]

Jonesdave116?

Jonesdave116, could there be double layers?

Should we ask Tusenfem to clarify and set us both straight?

My recollection is that Tusenfem has already answered that question sone time ago. Maybe it was somewhere else. However, to quote Tim Thompson, from a long time ago, in a thread in which you were active:
https://forum.cosmoquest.org/showthread.php?28596-Electric-Universe-Model&p=719805#post719805

In this paper the authors use more complete physics in analyzing the existence of electrostatic double layers in dusty plasmas, as applied to comets. They find that the previous, simpler models, overestimate the probability that a double layer can form. It turns out that the double layers that can form are also limited to relatively weak potential differences. So it does not look like one should expect double layers to be significant in a cometary environment.

http://adsabs.harvard.edu/cgi-bin/n...T&data_type=HTML&format=&high=4366fa465121643

 

[jonesdave116]

Tusenfem?

What has electrostatic elevation of dust particles got to do with double layers? How much dust do you think is being elevated, and what are you expecting it to do? We already have far more charged grains available once the comet becomes active.
Have a look at the Mendis paper on nucleus electrostatic charging, and notice that he didn't invoke DLs. Now, there was a bloke who was quite keen on DLs at the time.

 

[jonesdave116]

Ummm...never read the book, don't really know much about Velikovski and an ELECTRIC COMET is an electric comet and not a snowydirtyball or whatever the mainstream definition is morphing into! Deep fried ice cream was the last update i'd heard.

Because the idiot's belief in 'electric comets' is strictly to do with Velikovskian woo, whether you realise it or not. You know, his 'thunderbolts of the gods' nonsense? Lightning bolts hit Earth due to Velikovskian woo about planets hurtling around the solar system, a couple of weeks ago last Tuesday? These non-existent lightning bolts lift entire mountains off of Earth. That is why he needs them to be rock. Which they demonstrably aren't. That is why he didn't relay the information about ice at Tempel 1 and Hartley 2 to his acolytes. Doesn't fit with the myth of comets being rock, does it?
Why do you think he is trying his latest con of 'electric gravity'? Because comets demonstrably don't have a density commensurate with rock, do they? So, rather than accepting a huge amount of evidence that comets aren't rock, he is going to use his BSc (Physics & Electronics) to overthrow everything Newton and Einstein have ever taught us about gravity, so that comets can be heavier whilst seeming to be lighter! It also allows Venus to do all sorts of weirdness, as believed by the loon Velikovsky.
Like I said, the bloke is an idiot. What amazes me is how many people have fallen for this fairy tale.

 

[jonesdave116]

It should also be noted that in the Cosmoquest thread that I linked to previously, Tim Thompson linked to the paper where the detection of solid ice particles were detected by XMM-Newton. I have linked to it myself, numerous times.
Sol was active in that thread at the time, nearly 11 years ago! Yet, reading back through this thread, and its predecessor, I seem to remember the refrain from Sol of 'where is the ice', being oft repeated.
I can forgive ignorance; most people are ignorant of a whole range of subjects. What I can't forgive is wilful ignorance. That is, being continually shown the evidence to show that one's claims are unfounded, and simply ignoring them due to it not fitting into one's preconceived, unscientific worldview.

 

[tusenfem]

Brilliant! Those Russians sure are clever

Those russians are also way out of the box, with their idea that comets generate solar/stellar flares.

Mmmm....double layers!

Nope, only the user "cantdrive" is saying something about double layers, and the guy is obviously an EU proponent.
So, no, you missed again, sol.

 

[jonesdave116]

Well done RC!

Hadn't even searched myself for comets and double layers, should have been self evident for even those with a basic knowledge of plasma, electric fields, magnetic fields, charged particles and all that scary stuff that astronomers are terrified of!

Pick up any reputable book on astronomy flip to the index look up PLASMA! No listing? book my not even be worth wiping your behind on!

It's a fact that astronomers mathematicians HATE plasma!



Brilliant! Those Russians sure are clever

Study shows most water in lunar soil generated by solar wind, not result of comet or meteorite impacts



Mmmm....double layers!

l

Sorry, but Ibadov is essentially a crank. I've read some of his nonsense before. The part where he describes this process happening at 1-10 AU should have shown you that he was talking through an orifice in his nether regions. How is the CME reaching the nucleus of a comet when it is highly active? There have been more sensible papers on CMEs at comets published recently, based on actual observation. Not a chance this is happening.

As for water possibly being formed by the SW on the Moon; how many times do we need to tell you that the SW density, as measured, cannot produce, by many orders of magnitude, the amount of water being outgassed by 67P at even 3.5 AU? That is, ~ 1 litre. How is it creating water when the SW is not even reaching the nucleus for long periods? How many times are we going to have to point this out to you, before you get it through your head that the SW cannot explain the water (among other things) production at comets? Would you like to see the maths that the idiots Thornhill and Anariba should have done?

 

[tusenfem]

On the origin of striae in cometary dust tails

Yes, a paper from 1980 trying to come up with a model for striae, by two known scientists. For some reason they impose a double layer to generate the cross-tail current:

with the current carrying electrons and ions in the cross-tail neutral sheet being energized to about 1-10 ke V, possibly across an electrostatic double layer where the total voltage drop in the circuit is localized

for which I see no reason, actually. That the closure current over the outer part of the tail can be filamented, sure, no problem there.

However, they are talking about small grains with voltages up 60 to 300 V, which seems to be rather excessive. Indeed, in a recent paper by Mendis and Horanyi it is found that a whole comet could possibly get a voltage of up to 600 V depending on its interaction, but that smaller grains get charged between 1 and 10 volts.

Indeed they write on page 61:

Unfortunately, by neglecting the important role of secondary electron emission in the grain-charging processes, when energetic electrons may be
present (during disturbed solar wind conditions), they overestimated the surface potentials that the grains could acquire (60 V < |phi| < 300 V), which in turn led to an overestimate of the range of sizes, and the associated range of tensile strengths, of the grains that could be disrupted. While it is unlikely that |phi| would be much larger than about 20 V even during disturbed solar wind conditions, highly friable cometary grains with Ft < 105 N/ m2 could still be electrostatically disrupted when |phi| ≈ 20 V

 

[jonesdave116]

Large amplitude ion-acoustic rarefactive and compressive solitons and double layers in a dusty plasma with finite ion temperature

Yep, and we've just had a spacecraft with a whole suite of plasma instruments around a comet for over two years. Guess what? They didn't find any.
And I still do not understand what you expect these double layers to do? Please spell it out. Is it something to do with the discharges that are notable due to their complete absence? Or something else?

How dead does this electric comet woo have to be (due to a complete lack of evidence) before you realise that it is dead (due to a complete lack of evidence)?

 

[tusenfem]

Large amplitude ion-acoustic rarefactive and compressive solitons and double layers in a dusty plasma with finite ion temperature

This paper discusses some instabilities in a non-magnetized plasma, hardly the situation at comets, auroral plasma, magnetospheric plasma, pulsars, etc.

The fact that some things could happen, does not mean that they will happen. I wrote a predictive paper on ion cyclotron waves at comet 67P, and it turns out that, although theoretically it is correct, observationally there is no evidence for these waves.

 

[tusenfem]

The role of particle beams and electrical currents in the plasma universe



Oh...ummmm ELECTRIC UNIVERSE stuff

Yeah, that was when Peratt started to smoke too much and write his numerical simulation chapters in his book.
And why EEK? Did you not know that Peratt is supposed one of your gurus?

 

[tusenfem]

Electric fields and cold electrons in the vicinity of Comet Halley

It is concluded that the dust particles are strongly charged and partially coupled to cometary plasmas (or vice versa).

And what is it precisely what you want us to take home here, Sol?
(by the way I have cited this paper numerous times in this thread and in other EU threads. you just learned about it now?)

 

[jonesdave116]

I think you can now see were I'm going with it, JD116?

Getting harder and harder with the data to defend the deep fried ice cream model!

No, I have no idea where you are going. There is yet to be one single piece of evidence presented in favour of your electric comet woo. All the evidence says that it is not only wrong, but is scientifically impossible.
Perhaps you can spell out precisely what you believe is happening, rather than taking a gish-gallup approach, and posting a load of links to irrelevant or outdated material.
For clarity - where are your discharges, and why don't we see them; where is your rock, and why don't we see it? Let's start there, shall we?

 

[jonesdave116]

Originally Posted by Sol88;
I think you can now see were I'm going with it, JD116?

Getting harder and harder with the data to defend the deep fried ice cream model!

What are you talking about? Yet another quote from a press release, aimed at the layman? Picked up that trick from Thornhill have we? Try reading the science, just for a change:

Seasonal exposure of carbon dioxide ice on the nucleus of 67P
Filacchione,G. et al
http://science.sciencemag.org/content/early/2016/11/16/science.aag3161

Detection of exposed H2O ice on the nucleus of 67P
Barucci, M. A. et al
https://arxiv.org/pdf/1609.00551.pdf

BRIGHT ICE SPOTS ON THE NUCLEUS OF COMET 67PCHURYUMOVGERASIMENKO AS OBSERVED BY ROSETTA OSIRIS AND VIRTIS INSTRUMENTS
Barucci, M. A. et al
http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2016cosp...41E.152B

Porosity and water ice content of the sub-surface material in the Imhotep
von Allman, P.
http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2016EGUGA..1818371V

Infrared detection of exposed Carbon Dioxide ice on 67P CG nucleus
Filacchione,G. et al
http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2016EGUGA..1811930F

Relationship between inner coma water emissions and ice deposits in Comet 67P
Migliorini, A. et al
http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2016EGUGA..18.7911M

Exposed water ice on the nucleus of comet 67P
Filacchione,G. et al
http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v529/n7586/abs/nature16190.html

The diurnal cycle of water ice on comet 67P
https://www.researchgate.net/profil...erasimenko/links/568fa2b808aef987e56af009.pdf
De Sanctis, M. C. et al

Not to mention (which Thornhill didn't!) the ejection of ice grains at Tempel 1 and Hartley 2.

So, I repeat; what are you on about?

 

[Reality Check]

I said they are rocks NOT where they came from!

You have been citing Thunderbolts dogma for over 7 years ago and that includes the insanities of electrical discharges blasting comets from the Earth, etc..

If you want to deny that dogma and stick with a personal delusion that comets are rocks then we should get no further EU delusions from you. Somehow I doubt that !

 

[Reality Check]

Sol88: A lie that astronomers are scared of astrophysics that they learn as students

Well done RC!

Thank you but pointing out the abysmal ignorance of the Thunderbolts cult is basically shooting fish in a barrel! These are people so dumb that they cannot even do basic searches of the scientific literature.

But then tings go downhill with insults and delusions:
2 February 2017 Sol88: A lie that astronomers are scared of the astrophysics that they learn as students!

2 February 2017 Sol88: A lie that reputable astronomy books do not mention plasma.

2 February 2017 Sol88: A lie that astronomers "hate" plasma.

2 February 2017 Sol88: The repeated delusion that comets are the Moon!
Study shows most water in lunar soil generated by solar wind, not result of comet or meteorite impacts

2 February 2017 Sol88: A delusion that double layers appear in a study on the solar creating water in lunar soil.

 

[Reality Check]

Sol88: Delusion that double layers in dust tails have to do with his delusion

On the origin of striae in cometary dust tails

2 February 2017 Sol88: Delusion that possible double layers in cometary dust tails have to do with his delusion that comets are rocks.

 

[Reality Check]

Sol88: Delusion that a dusty plasma paper applies to his comets are rocks delusion

Large amplitude ion-acoustic rarefactive and compressive solitons and double layers in a dusty plasma with finite ion temperature

2 February 2017 Sol88: Delusion that a dusty plasma paper applies to his comets are rocks delusion.

 

[Reality Check]

Sol88: Delusion that magnetosheath boundaries have anything with his delusion

The protonopause-an ion composition boundary in the magnetosheath of comets, Venus and Mars

2 February 2017 Sol88: Delusion that magnetosheath boundaries have anything with his delusion that comets are rocks.