Continuation The Electric Comet Theory Boogaloo (Part 2)

Status
Not open for further replies.
Belz... said:
I've already said my piece on the matter, but as per my woo-plan outlined above, you just ignored every piece of evidence and reason thrown at you by everyone because it doesn't fit with the conclusion you want. Ergo, it's pointless to engage you except to ridicule your pet theory. You can declare victory all you want: you've already lost.
Click to expand...

Typical mainstreamer! back in :boxedin:
 
Sol88 said:
@Jonedave116



What's that in mainstream comet speak?




I remember MUPUS not being able to penetrate even a tiny fraction into the "Strongly-consolidated materials"!
Click to expand...

Have you played with plow walls in winter yet?

And the evidence for the density of a comet being close to a solid rock is...
 
Sol88 said:
My bold!

LINK

What say ye 'ol mate?
Click to expand...

Surface dust correlates to the composition of the body of the comet how, why do orbital mechanics say the density of the comet is not that of solid rock?

Most of the surface of the earth is water, so your conclusion from evaporated clouds off the oceans is that the earth is composed mostly of water?
 
From Sol's own aanda.org link http://www.aanda.org/articles/aa/pdf/forth/aa25980-15.pdf :

]The maps for the sputtered atoms differ significantly from the maps for volatile species, such as the water map, and in some cases they are almost anticorrelated. Our present understanding is that these atoms are the result of solar wind sputtering of refractory material, that is, of dust located on the cometary surface.
Click to expand...


So, the source of the refractory species is dust, not rock, and is negatively correlated with water production. As further detailed by

The sputtered silicon shows a behavior distinctly different from H2O, it is mostly observed in areas of low water activity. Therefore, the highest sputter fluxes are observed when the spacecraft is above the less illuminated winter hemisphere and above either of the two lobes, that is to say, when the smallest cross section of the comet is exposed to the Sun and in the field of view of DFMS.
Click to expand...


Hey Sol, why don't we see the Si and the water together? Your EC "hyppthesis" says the O for the water comes from rock. But your own citation says when there's lots of water in the gas column above the comet, the solar wind can't reach the surface in that area to cause sputtering!
 
Last edited:
Sol88 said:
My bold

cough cough ahhemm LINK
Click to expand...

I'm talking about the H2O above the sunlit hemisphere. Not possible according to your idiotic hypothesis. I quote the aforementioned eejit Thornhill: "When astronomers view the comas of comets spectroscopically, what they actually see is the hydroxyl radical (OH), which they assume to be a residue of water (H2O) broken down by the ultraviolet light of the Sun (photolysis)..............The mysteries find direct answers electrically—in the transaction between a negatively charged comet nucleus and the Sun. In the electric model, negative oxygen ions are accelerated away from the comet in energetic jets, then combine preferentially with protons from the solar wind to form the observed OH radical and the neutral hydrogen gathered around the coma in vast concentric bubbles. These abundances simply confirm the energetic charge exchange between the nucleus and the Sun."

Wrong, on so many levels.
 
Sol88 said:
You are very good at understanding English, what are they trying to tell us?
Click to expand...
The ubiquitous presence of fractured materials on the surface of the comet is of paramount significance for a body that displays a very low bulk density of ~0.5 kg/m3 is telling us that Sol88 remains in denial of reality after 6 years :jaw-dropp!
The bulk density of ~0.5 kg/m3 is less than that of water - 67P is not made of rock as in your delusion.

Confirmation of 28 July 2015 Sol88: I know that you are too obsessed with your delusion that comets are rocks to ever accept any explanation for anything from anyone.

36 days of being afraid of doing simple 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 said:
Fractured dust...
Click to expand...
Fractured dust...that is a new delusion from you, Sol88! But then what else have we had from you in the last few days :p?

jonesdave116 states real world facts
* Dust exists in space and comets are made of this dust an ices.
* This duct contains silicates.
* Thus dust emitted from comets contains silicates.

Sol88 rants about fractures in dust!
 
Sol88 said:
Doubt it! ...
Click to expand...
More ranting from Sol88 with the idiocy that the EC delusion is supported by
  • language changing
  • the standard practice of scientists getting first use of data they spend 20 years collecting :jaw-dropp!
  • Sol88's delusion that there are rocks in comet images.
  • Sol88's delusion that "a very low bulk density of ~0.5 kg/m3" is the density of rock.
  • Sol88's delusion that bulk density is the density of dust.
    Bulk density is the average density of the entire comet.
 
I'll tell you one thing about this electric gubbins that I've always been amazed about; it is obviously variable, and always seems to peak (and therefore H2O production peaks) when the Sun is overhead. Bloody clever is that.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Share this page

ISF - Join now!

Every member here is approved by hand. No bots, no spam, just people who care about evidence and honest debate.

Membership is free!

Create your free account

Back
Top Bottom