Continuation The Electric Comet Theory Boogaloo (Part 2)

[Sol88]

Come on guyz! Let's just concede, Sol88 is right, let him write the ultimate model of electric comets.

Cheers mate, I'll make sure you get a mention!

 

[Sol88]

Anybody care to have a crack at what Holger Sierks was meaning when he said "the driving of activity is cliffs???

Also when asked a straight forward question he gave answer that sound like a politicians, dodge weave change the question...why? The've been observing these jets for nearly a year and in 3D and they still don't know???

Be pissed if it was my money

 

[Sol88]

 

[Sol88]

and I think this meme wraps the whole dirtysnowball theory!!

 

[jonesdave116]

Anybody care to have a crack at what Holger Sierks was meaning when he said "the driving of activity is cliffs???

Also when asked a straight forward question he gave answer that sound like a politicians, dodge weave change the question...why? The've been observing these jets for nearly a year and in 3D and they still don't know???

Be pissed if it was my money

Probably because the cliffs, and the pit walls, are where ice is exposed closer to the surface. Have a look at a cliff. On top you can't see the rock beneath. On the comet it will be covered by dust and organics. That can't settle to the same degree on a cliff face, due to gravity. Have a look at a cliff face. That is where the underlying material is exposed. Same with the pit walls, once enough material has sublimated from beneath to form a pit. Ditto why the boulders that fall off the cliffs show exposed ice.
Because they're made of ice. Not rock, which is ~3.0g cm^3.

 

[jonesdave116]

Well that only leaves you with "comets and other bodies" and Earth's water never came from a comet so the ONLY viable alternative is other bodies, presumable asteroids (ROCKS).

Whoops seems you have painted yourself into a corner...again

Nope. This comet shows deuterium ratios which are not in line with the Earth's ratios. Other comets, where this has been measured, show closer values. And yes, there is water in meteorites and asteroids. Not as much, relatively speaking, but it's there.
The whole question of where and how Earth got its water is an ongoing question. Many more measurements will need to be made, as we are horribly short of time machines. One thing is for sure, EU has nothing useful to add to the debate.

 

[Reality Check]

...back to the interesting stuff
Rosetta orbiter science

He is exactly saying "OSIRIS has been monitoring the activity of dust jets in order to find their source", Sol88 !
Non-deluded people know that comets are made of ices and dust so:

• Standing walls of ices and dust can be sources of jets.
• Cliffs of ices and dust can be sources of jets.
• "flat lands" of ices and dust can be sources of jets

Confused by basic English, Sol88 !

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.
That is 32 days of fear of physics and counting (10 years for Thunderbolts), Sol88 !

 

[Reality Check]

...at the jets source, there should be a hole/orifice with sublimating ice present?

Rational, knowledgeable people can understand English
Sam Gulkis says "We see water coming out of regions which are usually on a boundary" That is according to you "the boundary between an illuminated piece of the comet and a non illuminated piece of the comet". Thus as the shadow area gets exposed to the sun, the ices heat up and they emit gas.
This is not in your idiotically irrelevant links (comets are not moons!) and the total delusion of electrical discharges on comets.

 

[Reality Check]

Sol88: The fantasy that Earth is a comet + "dirty snowballs" fantasy

Well that only leaves you with "comets and other bodies"

Actually it leaves you with the continued and repeated delusion that Earth's water never came from a comet means comets are rocks, Sol88.

22nd April 2015 Sol88: The fantasy that Earth is a comet + "dirty snowballs" fantasy

 

[Reality Check]

Anybody care to have a crack at what Holger Sierks was meaning when he said "the driving of activity is cliffs???

So we have a paranoid rant about what a comment sounded like!
www.esa.int/esatv/content/download/342714/15476782/EbS97722.doc looks like a fuller transcript of the interviews for that short video.

10:01:40
[GVS OF NARROW ANGLE CAMERA COPY AND OSIRIS LAB, MAX PLANCK INSTITUTE FOR SOLAR SYSTEM RESEARCH]
This narrow angle camera at the Max Planck Institute for Solar System Research is exactly the same as the one onboard Rosetta, which recently detected more than a hundred patches of water ice on the comet’s surface. Together with a wide-angled camera, it forms the OSIRIS instrument – a copy is inside this vacuum chamber to test commands. Apart from imaging the surface, OSIRIS has been monitoring the activity of dust jets in order to find their source.

10:02:14
[INSET CLIP: HOLGER SIERKS
PRINCIPAL INVESTIGATOR, OSIRIS INSTRUMENT]
“We see them either at various places either as standing walls, big huge cliffs, often 200m up to 700m these big huge cliffs on back side of the head lobe but we also see many of these upright walls in the pits that have typical diameter of 200m. And so these are the source, the main source region…you can’t rule out flatlands - we also have a few indications of activity in flatlands - but the driving activity is cliffs.”

He is saying that the most of the jets can be traced to "cliffs" !
* standing walls drive the jet activity
* big huge cliffs drive the jet activity
* upright walls in the pits drive the jet activity
* flatland's may drive the jet activity

 

[Reality Check]

...idiotic image snipped...

Yes, Sol88, we have traced the sources of comet jets on 67P to places that debunk your ignorant and deluded idea that they are electrical discharges from comets made of rock .
No high points - low points (flatlands), cliffs and pits!

 

[Reality Check]

and I think this meme wraps the whole dirtysnowball theory!!
...idiotic image snipped...

No, Sol88, that meme illustrates your continued mindless support of the ignorant and deluded idea that there are electrical discharges from comets made of rock .

Lies about the real world where we have traced comet jets to places that the EC delusion states that cannot be (e.g. low points such as pits) does not change the real world. Those lies are

• No one "says" exposed water ice - they cite the detection of hundreds of areas of exposed water ice on 57P.
• No one "says" jet pit - they cite that the walls of pits are a source of jets on 67P.

 

[rwguinn]

Other than its geometric relationship to a relative radial to the CG of the comet, will someone explain to me the actual difference between a "cliff" and "flat" on a body of that size and mass?

 

[Matthew Cline]

Well that only leaves you with "comets and other bodies" and Earth's water never came from a comet so the ONLY viable alternative is other bodies, presumable asteroids (ROCKS).

Wait, wait. Are you saying the the ECH explains where Earthly water came from?

 

[Jrrarglblarg]

Electromawhachimagoozical WhateverISM is the chiropracty of space physics - it claims to explain everything but explains nothing because it's totally wonk.

 

[Reality Check]

Other than its geometric relationship to a relative radial to the CG of the comet, will someone explain to me the actual difference between a "cliff" and "flat" on a body of that size and mass?

The difference that I think that Rosetta scientists are thinking of is that a flat surface will retain a deeper dust layer than a "cliff". Thus cliffs and pit walls are more exposed to sunlight and the ices that they are made of are more likely to sublimate to form jets.
As far as pits are concerned though, they form because ices sublimate despite the insulation of the dust layer, e.g. because that area is not in shade for very long. That exposes the walls which then becomes the primary source of jets. Thus steep sided, empty pits will change to shallow, dust filled pits as they age and we see such a variation in pits.

 

[Sol88]

Probably because the cliffs, and the pit walls, are where ice is exposed closer to the surface. Have a look at a cliff. On top you can't see the rock beneath. On the comet it will be covered by dust and organics. That can't settle to the same degree on a cliff face, due to gravity. Have a look at a cliff face. That is where the underlying material is exposed. Same with the pit walls, once enough material has sublimated from beneath to form a pit. Ditto why the boulders that fall off the cliffs show exposed ice.
Because they're made of ice. Not rock, which is ~3.0g cm^3.

So how do the cliffs and pit walls form a "jet" with all the measured parameters so far, jonesdave116???


Why not have a crack as well Reality Check??

You know just to set the lurkers right

we know this theory...

Formation of jets in Comet 19P/Borrelly by subsurface geysers

Abstract
Observations of the inner coma of Comet 19P/Borrelly with the camera on the Deep Space 1 spacecraft revealed several highly collimated
dust jets emanating from the nucleus. The observed jets can be produced by acceleration of evolved gas from a subsurface cavity through
a narrow orifice to the surface. As long as the cavity is larger than the orifice, the pressure in the cavity will be greater than the ambient
pressure in the coma and the flow from the geyser will be supersonic. The gas flow becomes collimated as the sound speed is approached and
dust entrainment in the gas flow creates the observed jets. Outside the cavity, the expanding gas loses its collimated character, but the density
drops rapidly decoupling the dust and gas, allowing the dust to continue in a collimated beam. The hypothesis proposed here can explain the
jets seen in the inner coma of Comet 1P/Halley as well, and may be a primary mechanism for cometary activity.

2003 Published by Elsevier Inc.

 

[Sol88]

So we have a paranoid rant about what a comment sounded like!
www.esa.int/esatv/content/download/342714/15476782/EbS97722.doc looks like a fuller transcript of the interviews for that short video.

He is saying that the most of the jets can be traced to "cliffs" !
* standing walls drive the jet activity
* big huge cliffs drive the jet activity
* upright walls in the pits drive the jet activity
* flatland's may drive the jet activity

10:02:14
[INSET CLIP: HOLGER SIERKS
PRINCIPAL INVESTIGATOR, OSIRIS INSTRUMENT]
“We see them either at various places either as standing walls, big huge cliffs, often 200m up to 700m these big huge cliffs on back side of the head lobe but we also see many of these upright walls in the pits that have typical diameter of 200m. And so these are the source, the main source region…you can’t rule out flatlands - we also have a few indications of activity in flatlands - but the driving activity is cliffs.”

The jets are standing walls? what's a standing wall, Reality Check?

"the driving activity is cliffs"???? How??

or is he saying there are cliffs big huge cliffs on back side of the head lobe??

Still highly confused as to what exactly Holger Sierks is saying?

 

[Sol88]

Yes, Sol88, we have traced the sources of comet jets on 67P to places that debunk your ignorant and deluded idea that they are electrical discharges from comets made of rock .
No high points - low points (flatlands), cliffs and pits!

Ummm... is a cliff a high point compared to flatlands, Reality Check?


Maybe your "standing walls" are?

 

[tusenfem]

Well that only leaves you with "comets and other bodies" and Earth's water never came from a comet so the ONLY viable alternative is other bodies, presumable asteroids (ROCKS).

Whoops seems you have painted yourself into a corner...again

my bold
That is an incorrect statement. The water on Earth cannot come from 67P-type comets, however, in other comets that have been visited and studied it was found that the H-to-D ratio was in agreement with the Earth's ratios.