Continuation The Electric Comet Theory Boogaloo (Part 2)

[tusenfem]

Now something about "Sand Dunes" on 67P...Rosetta spied shifting dunes on Comet 67P – so how did they form?

Cherry picking again solly?

But comets have gas jets escaping their sun-warmed daytime sides – jets that, in the case of Comet 67P, may graze the surface at speeds of 100 metres or more per second.

This is fast enough that in the comet’s low gravity they have the power, Claudin says, to move not just dust, but rocks up to a metre wide.

The physics of tenuous, high-speed gas flows means they don’t launch these rocks into space, but instead move them sedately over the surface until they pile up into dunes.

Seems mainstream are stumped yet again

Seems Sol is pulling a DonaldTrump again.

 

[jonesdave116]

Explaining the unexpected presence of dune-like patterns at the surface of the comet 67P/Churyumov–Gerasimenko requires conceptual and quantitative advances in the understanding of surface and outgassing processes. We show here that vapor flow emitted by the comet around its perihelion spreads laterally in a surface layer, due to the strong pressure difference between zones illuminated by sunlight and those in shadow. For such thermal winds to be dense enough to transport grains—10 times greater than previous estimates—outgassing must take place through a surface porous granular layer, and that layer must be composed of grains whose roughness lowers cohesion consistently with contact mechanics. The linear stability analysis of the problem, entirely tested against laboratory experiments, quantitatively predicts the emergence of bedforms in the observed wavelength range and their propagation at the scale of a comet revolution.
Although generated by a rarefied atmosphere, they are paradoxically analogous to ripples emerging on granular beds submitted to viscous shear flows. This quantitative agreement shows that our understanding of the coupling between hydrodynamics and sediment transport is able to account for bedform emergence in extreme conditions and provides a reliable tool to predict the erosion and accretion processes controlling the evolution of small solar system bodies.

My bolding.

Giant ripples on comet 67P/Churyumov-Gerasimenko sculpted by sunset thermal wind
Jia, P. et al
https://arxiv.org/pdf/1703.02592.pdf

Doesn't sound as if they are particularly stumped to me. In fact, the only people who are stumped, and being very quiet on the matter, are the geniuses who came up with the electric comet charade, and promised us all kinds of impossible, exciting electric woo.

 

[jonesdave116]

Oooh, here's something I just remembered from the genius Thornhill:

The primary distinction between comet and asteroid surfaces is that electrical
arcing and “electrostatic cleaning” of the comet nucleus will leave little or no
dust or debris on the surface during the active phase.........

From that 'electric comet' poster which, as far as I can tell, was never presented.

So, no chance of ripples in Thornhill's dust, as it shouldn't be there!

 

[Dancing David]

I sure have seen many effects in melting ice...

 

[Sol88]

Cherry picking again solly?






Seems Sol is pulling a DonaldTrump again.

Ha ha ha...

Do you think the grains would be subject to triboelectric, or frictional, charging then?

Electric fields and ionic winds are far more powerful than "winds" from sublimating "ice"!!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jTA9MxaauG8

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dSRLb85UAEA

Any electric fields on comet 67P, Tusenfem?

 

[jonesdave116]

Electric fields and ionic winds are far more powerful than "winds" from sublimating "ice"!!

Really? Using what parameters? The experiment in the paper on Titan used grain sizes of 300 - 1000 microns (0.3-1.0 mm). Secondly, as the authors of that paper state:

The majority of Titan’s dune grains possibly do not acquire charges large enough to overcome the effects of wind drag and gravity.

Thirdly, to acquire triboelectric charge, the grains must first be set in motion.
And, fourthly, the grain sizes considered in the 67P paper are much larger than those in the Titan paper.
And gas forces from sublimation are hardly weak. H2O has an expansion velocity of ~600 m/s. Remember those CO2 jets at Hartley 2? Lifting dirty great pieces of ice into the coma? The problem the authors of the 67P paper had to consider, was that the gas force is too high. How do they keep the grains on the comet? That is what the paper is about.

 

[Matthew Cline]

Really? Using what parameters?

The parameters in Sol88's intuition. Duh!

 

[tusenfem]

Ha ha ha...

Do you think the grains would be subject to triboelectric, or frictional, charging then?

Electric fields and ionic winds are far more powerful than "winds" from sublimating "ice"!!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jTA9MxaauG8

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dSRLb85UAEA

Any electric fields on comet 67P, Tusenfem?

Really, Sol, the onus is on YOU to show that it is so, not mine, I will believe what scientists more versed in this topic than me write up in their peer reviewed paper.

thunderdolts can make pretty videos (maybe) but nothing of substance has come out from them in any recognized journal, even though they claim to have the Truth in their pockets.

As for electric fields, sure there are some, why would there not be, the main source being the moving magnetic field of the solar wind generating an v x B electric field. It is just that they are not doing anything your thunderdolts or EU/EC/ES friends are claiming. So no, Vallis Marinaris was NOT created by lightning bolts and neither was the Grand Canyon.

 

[Reality Check]

Sol88: Unthinking belief in the delusion that comets are rocks is no laughing matter

Ha ha ha...

3 April 2017 Sol88: Unthinking belief in Thunderbolts cult delusions, e.g. that comets are rocks, is no laughing matter when it leads to lies and delusions.

3 April 2017 Sol88: Lying about the Thunderbolts delusions about comets which includes little or no dust on the surface of comets when active (pointed out by jonesdave116 ).

3 April 2017 Sol88: Repeats his delusion that Titan is a comet revealing deep ignorance about what he cites (what a surprise).
Titan is an icy moon in orbit around Saturn (not the Sun) with a permanent and significant atmosphere. A rational person would expect dunes on Titan! The puzzle is why they point in the opposite way expected from the prevailing winds. The newest solution is that there is an electrostatic component to the cohesion between dune grains. That means that it is the high winds in storms that are most capable of moving the dunes. The storms on Titan blow the opposite way from the prevailing winds.
Electric Sand: How Titan's Dunes Got Their Weird Shapes

3 April 2017 Sol88: The delusion that lying, deluded Thunderbolts YouTube videos are valid science.
Here we have

• A video lying about the 67P dunes - they no longer "mystify" scientists as the paper you cited explains.
  The description starts with an a persistent Thunderbolts lie of "The ESA's Rosetta mission to comet 67P has shattered consensus theories about the origin and nature of comets".
  The ESA's Rosetta mission to comet 67P has confirmed the consensus of the nature and origin comets.
  We have measured the density of 67P which is less than that of water like other comet density measurements.
  We have measured that 67P is made of ices and dust.
  We have measured that 6P has a bulk porosity of ~70%.
  We have images of gas & dust jets being emitted from inside pits.
  We have traced gas & dust jets to features such as "flat" plains and the sides of cliffs.
• The delusion that Valles Marineris was blasted out by electric discharges in their planets whizzing around the Solar system delusion !

The parroting of the Thunderbolt cult ignorance, delusions and lies in this thread alone (continuation of a thread that is now 7 years of delusions from Sol88 and Haig!).
10th April 2015: The ignorance, delusions and lies in the Thunderbolts web site, videos, etc.
More than a year and counting of fear of doing basic physics: 25 June 2015 Sol88: Use a impact calculator to calculate the size of the crater on a comet made of rock by the Deep Impact impactor.

 

[Sol88]

SNIP

As for electric fields, sure there are some, why would there not be, the main source being the moving magnetic field of the solar wind generating an v x B electric field. It is just that they are not doing anything your thunderdolts or EU/EC/ES friends are claiming. So no, Vallis Marinaris was NOT created by lightning bolts and neither was the Grand Canyon.

Nuff said really, ay

Any sensible person would ask, "What do these electric fields do?"

Reality Check?

Don't really have to ask Tusenfem, 'cos he already knows...

What if they may accelerate negativity charged grains of dust off the comet and attract positively charged ions toward the comet?

 

[Reality Check]

Reality Check?

A sensible person would not believe the lies and delusions of the Thunderbolts cult, Sol88.
The parroting of the Thunderbolt cult ignorance, delusions and lies in this thread alone (continuation of a thread that is now 7 years of delusions from Sol88 and Haig!).
10th April 2015: The ignorance, delusions and lies in the Thunderbolts web site, videos, etc.
More than a year and counting of fear of doing basic physics: 25 June 2015 Sol88: Use a impact calculator to calculate the size of the crater on a comet made of rock by the Deep Impact impactor.

The sensible question is: Why is Sol88 still in denial of the real world after 7 years of people trying to educate him?

The basics are high school science, Sol88. The Sun has a magnetic field. The sublimating ices on comets including 67P create a coma of gas and dust. Sunlight ionizes the gas and charges dust grains. These are charged particles moving in a magnetic field. They generate an electric field (Maxwell's equations) in the coma.

 

[jonesdave116]

The basics are high school science, Sol88. The Sun has a magnetic field. The sublimating ices on comets including 67P create a coma of gas and dust. Sunlight ionizes the gas and charges dust grains. These are charged particles moving in a magnetic field. They generate an electric field (Maxwell's equations) in the coma.

And then, of course, there comes a time when the diamagnetic cavity has formed. In the case of 67P this was, from memory, at roughly 150-300 km from the nucleus. At Halley it was ~4000 km. So, the IMF is not penetrating that cavity. Therefore, I fail to see how all these surface changes are happening due to a very distant electric field. And they seem to be happening when the comet is most active. That is, when neither the IMF nor the solar wind are getting within cooee of the nucleus. Far more parsimonious to suggest that the rearrangement of the dust is due to something that we do know is happening - outgassing.
Still, the TB loons can look up a few papers on the subject of the electric fields in the coma, and work out what the charge on the dust would need to be for it to be 'attracted' to this electric field from the nucleus to the coma. That will not go well. Hence why they make silly videos, with zero scientific content.

 

[tusenfem]

Nuff said really, ay

Any sensible person would ask, "What do these electric fields do?"

Well for one, the motional electric field of the solar wind accelerates the newly born ions, so that they start gyrating around the field lines. In the case of low magnetic field strength this will generate the singing comet.

Basically, there is not much to say about any electric fields apart from a paper by Tomas Karlsson (see e.g. EGU abstract here) which is accepted for publication in a journal, but I cannot remember which at the moment (possibly MNRAS). The electric fields, as also Harry Laakso showed for Halley, are all `"high frequency" fields, as can also be seen in this Master's thesis by Dickeli (whom I don't know personally).

The thing is, large scale electric fields as you would like them, Sol, do not show up, and there is a reason for that, because the coma of the comet is filled with plasma and just like "natura horret vacuum" one can also say "plasma horret electrica agro".

So, you can always go to PSA or PDS and get some of the data from Rosetta or Giotto or VEGA1/2 and then try out for yourself, or get your friends from thunder to do some real work. However, I have yet to see any real work with data from that "source".

Of course I, we (Rosetta RPC) are only mainstream sheeple, and thus don't look out of the box and only produce incorrect papers and were lucky as hell that somehow the electric comet behaved in such a way that we were able to use our incorrect gravitation model to guide the spacecraft around the bristling discharging block of rock.

 

[jonesdave116]

<snip>
Of course I, we (Rosetta RPC) are only mainstream sheeple, and thus don't look out of the box and only produce incorrect papers and were lucky as hell that somehow the electric comet behaved in such a way that we were able to use our incorrect gravitation model to guide the spacecraft around the bristling discharging block of rock.

Shame on you. Why haven't you spent your time looking for non-existent woo? I am shocked! How close did Philae get to the nucleus? Whoops, that's right, it landed on it. What sort of magnetic fields did it detect? Why not report this? OK, you did. Zilch, was the answer.
What about Rosetta? How close did that get to the nucleus? Oh, dayum, it went and 'landed' on it too, didn't it? With many instruments turned on all the way down. What did it detect? Well, yet to hear in detail, but as far as the electric comet woo is concerned, it is not looking good.
What I would like to know (and will never have answered), is what did these nutjobs think came out of Tempel 1? That was spectroscopically resolved as being H₂O ice? Back in 2005 (OK, not reported 'til 2006/07). What did they think all the white stuff being ejected from Hartley 2 was? Spectroscopically it was H₂O ice. Being ejected by extremely non-electrical CO₂ jets. What did the idiot Thornhill think? Any clues?
Please give me a reason, Sol, not to call the idiot Thornhill an idiot. I can't think of one. Ergo, he is an idiot. Prove otherwise. Please.

 

[jonesdave116]

OK, not to dwell too long on the idiot Thornhill, let's turn to his, ahem, accomplice:

• likelihood of a hot and dry surface ("hot," as in the familiar lexicon of comet science)
• no layers's of ice exposed beneath the surface, despite the requirements of standard theory
• no ice at the source of jets, not even where the most energetic jets are active
• electric discharge as the essential contributor to the comet's increasing activity
• abundance of unexplained rocky debris on the surface, as seen on asteroids, including sharp edged boulders exhibiting no ices.
• visible electrical erosion of the surface in the fashion of electrical etching of surface materials and electric discharge machining (edm)
• surface electrochemically transformed and burned black by this discharge activity, as in laboratory experiments
• focused glow discharge enigmatically moving across the surface during the course of the Rosetta observations
• useful comparisons of this activity to the moving electrified plumes of Jupiter's moon Io and Saturn's moon Enceladus
• electric fields configuring and reconfiguring layers of dust on the surface, despite the absence of an atmosphere
• removal of “astonishing,” complex crystalline molecules from the surface, with comparisons to materials on planets and moons, likely including Mars or Earth, or both.
• no appreciable “stardust,” the long-presumed primeval matter of comets
• no support for the long-presumed "compositional zoning" in textbook solar system history and comet theory
• useful comparison of dust configurations on the surface to formations seen in laboratory experiments with electric fields acting on layers of dust
• x-ray and ultraviolet emissions exceeding any scientific predictions just 20 years ago
• evidence for electrochemical production of hydroxyl and/or water by electrical action on surface silicates and clays
• evidence for production of water and/or hydroxyl by electrical activity in the coma
• unexpected negative ions close to the nucleus
• improbable hydrogen cloud gathered and held in place at the outer regions of the coma
• additional electrochemical transactions in the coma adding to diverse chemistry, ranging from CO2 to methane, alcohol, cyanide, and more
• relationship of comet flaring to arrival of charged particles from solar outbursts

Add the POSSIBILITY of a break-up of the nucleus in response to a solar outburst, though that’s not something I'd hang a hat on.

David Talbott

http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showpost.php?p=10359420&postcount=2441

That has not gone well, has it?

 

[jonesdave116]

And here is a post from an EC supporter from over a decade ago, saying how this woo might be shown to be woo:

I can't answer all of your questions, but it would be possible to test the Electric Comet with today's technology. Close-ups of the bright spots should show they are dynamic, change in brightness with the size of the coma, to monitor this, the Rosetta mission could be crucial.

If the misson works as intended (accompanying a comet from the aphelion to the perihelion) it would show exactly the dynamics of the bright spots (electric arcs) that are the sites of EDM activity. These arcs should be found on (actually above) high surface features, and should be at the boundaries of circular depressions (steep cliffs) and show spectral features consistent with electric arcs (UV). The surface of a comet should markedly change by this activity, predominantly at the places of the bright spots/patches.

Further tests are:
- Water molecules should be found away from the nucleus, not close to the nucleus (mostly at the interface, double layer, that marks the peak in X-ray activity).
- Jets and bright spots shoud be correlated, the brightest spots should result in the strongest jets.
- A comet's surface should have very little dust
- A comet's nucleus is comparable to asteroids in composition.

The point here is that these tests are qualitative, but unique for an electric comet. I think they are specific enough to falsify the EC idea some can be done with current technology. There are more tests, but I'm not sure how feasible they are.

Cheers.

https://forum.cosmoquest.org/showthread.php?41761-Electric-Comets&p=908544#post908544

Again, that has not gone well, has it?

Let us take it point by point:

EDM (lol)

Err, nope. Shown to be ice. Let's move on.

Consistent with electric arcs (UV)

Oh dear. Nope. ALICE can see in UV, and saw nowt of the kind.

Water molecules should be found away from the nucleus, not close to the nucleus (mostly at the interface, double layer, that marks the peak in X-ray activity).

Whoops again. Water was seen from 0 - 500m of the nucleus. Fail.

Jets and bright spots shoud be correlated, the brightest spots should result in the strongest jets.

Nope. Totally unpredictable.

A comet's surface should have very little dust

Oh dear.

A comet's nucleus is comparable to asteroids in composition.

No. Really, no. Rosetta visited a couple of asteroids. Couldn't be more different.
I wonder if this guy still believes this nonsense, or whether he has grown up?

 

[jonesdave116]

And I'll give you a wager Tim, if the Rosetta mission is a success, no malfunction and so on, and there is indeed the required amount of water to account for the tail, then I'll happily come over and eat my shorts.

Somebody said that on Cosmoquest, over a decade ago. I'll have to check my references to see exactly who said it Unless the poster would like to own up here and now. Assuming he can type whilst digesting his underwear.

 

[Sol88]

Oh dear.

Quote:
A comet's nucleus is comparable to asteroids in composition.
No. Really, no. Rosetta visited a couple of asteroids. Couldn't be more different.
I wonder if this guy still believes this nonsense, or whether he has grown up?

Oh Dear...Ceres' temporary atmosphere linked to solar activity

Because of this evidence for abundant ice, many scientists think that Ceres' exosphere is created in a process similar to what occurs on comets, even though they are much smaller. In that model, the closer Ceres gets to the sun, the more water vapor is released because of ice sublimating near or at the surface.

But the new study suggests comet-like behavior may not explain the mix of detections and non-detections of a weak atmosphere.

"Sublimation probably is present, but we don't think it's significant enough to produce the amount of exosphere that we're seeing," Villarreal said.

snip

The research began with a 2016 Science study led by Chris Russell. The study, using GRaND data, suggested that, during a six-day period in 2015, Ceres had accelerated electrons from the solar wind to very high energies.

Read more at: https://phys.org/news/2017-04-ceres-temporary-atmosphere-linked-solar.html#jCp

Wonder if a comet (in this case 67p) should do the same thing????.....oh wait Suprathermal electron environment of comet 67P/Churyumov-Gerasimenko: Observations from the Rosetta Ion and Electron Sensor

Results. We find that interaction of the solar wind with this comet is highly turbulent and stronger than expected based on historical studies, especially for this weakly outgassing comet. The presence of highly dynamical suprathermal electrons is consistent with observations of comets (e.g., Giacobinni-Zinner, Grigg-Skjellerup) near 1 AU with higher outgassing rates. However, comet 67P/Churyumov-Gerasimenko is much farther from the Sun and appears to lack an upstream bow shock.

Conclusions. The mass loading process, which likely is the cause of these processes, plays a stronger role at large distances from the Sun than previously expected. We discuss the possible mechanisms that most likely are responsible for this acceleration: heating by waves generated by the pick-up ion instability, and the admixture of cometary photoelectrons.

Seems there's a continuum between dormant lumps of ROCK and active lumps of ROCK....

May also include a MOON, Reality Check....NASA study finds solar storms could spark soils at moon's poles

xplosive solar activity, like flares and coronal mass ejections, blasts highly energetic, electrically charged particles into space. Earth's atmosphere shields us from most of this radiation, but on the moon, these particles—ions and electrons—slam directly into the surface. They accumulate in two layers beneath the surface; the bulky ions can't penetrate deeply because they are more likely to hit atoms in the regolith, so they form a layer closer to the surface while the tiny electrons slip through and form a deeper layer. The ions have positive charge while the electrons carry negative charge. Since opposite charges attract, normally these charges flow towards each other and balance out.

Read more at: https://phys.org/news/2017-01-nasa-solar-storms-soils-moon.html#jCp

Food for thought, ay JD116!

 

[jonesdave116]

Errm, and what has that got to do with the price of fish? I'm not sure how many times we have to say this; the solar wind is not reaching anywhere near the nucleus of a comet for long periods of time. Yes? And quite what you think the SW interaction with the coma has got to do with anything is anybody's guess. Just keep making stuff up, sunshine. Refer back to Talbott's post, above. Where was all this electric woo?

 

[Reality Check]

Sol88: The delusion that Ceres and Moon are comets

Oh Dear...Ceres' temporary atmosphere linked to solar activity

7 April 2017 Sol88: The delusion that Ceres and Moon are comets !

7 April 2017 Sol88: Abysmal ignorance about what he cites and quotes - probable patches of sublimating ices on Ceres !
A transient atmosphere on Ceres lasting days and vanishing. That is not the long term coma of comets that last for weeks or months!
No tails from the atmospheric releases on Ceres. Comets have tails!
The transient atmosphere on Ceres seems to be correlated to the solar wind. No such correlation for comets!
Ceres has a tiny amount of ice. Comet have a lot of ice!

The usual "drunk the Kool-Aid" post from a Thunderbolts cult follower.