Continuation The Electric Comet Theory Boogaloo (Part 2)

[Haig]

Maybe only in the delusions of the Thunderbolts crowd, Sol88 - double layer explode so they would "scream" !

We have the stupidity of linking to the 1986 Double Layers in Astrophysics Symposium.

We do not have any data about your delusion that there are double layer/s that surround 67P, Sol88, except you repeating that delusion.
Times stating the delusion that there are double layers around 67 P = 2 (from memory).

Others are seeing the flaws in the mainstream dogma too RC

"Another interesting hypothesis concerns the nature of mass. In the Electric Universe, mass and energy are completely interconnected (as in E = mc2); mass is proportional to electromagnetic stress [9]. Hence the low mass (low density) of 67P may simply indicate that the comet is under low electromagnetic stress, being electrically connected in an electric plasma circuit that includes the Sun."

Rosetta for a Water Universe

 

[Andy_Ross]

Institute Of Science in Society?

Wow a bigger bunch of loons you will never find.

 

[Lukraak_Sisser]

Others are seeing the flaws in the mainstream dogma too RC

"Another interesting hypothesis concerns the nature of mass. In the Electric Universe, mass and energy are completely interconnected (as in E = mc2); mass is proportional to electromagnetic stress [9]. Hence the low mass (low density) of 67P may simply indicate that the comet is under low electromagnetic stress, being electrically connected in an electric plasma circuit that includes the Sun."

Rosetta for a Water Universe

Yes, provided you ignore all empirical evidence to date, I'm sure that makes sense.
In the meantime, mainsteam science keeps producing results, not youtube videos.

 

[Haig]

Institute Of Science in Society?

Wow a bigger bunch of loons you will never find.

What are you saying? ... that The Institute of Science in Society (ISIS) is worse than the AGW Alarmists ! OMG !

Nope, they are the real loons

 

[tusenfem]

What are the diamagnetic properties for the nucleus of 67P?

That is what I am asking YOU, Sol88. I know what the properties are/will be. And actually this is the time that, according to predictions, that the cavity should be measured. I am sure my colleagues in Braunschweig are looking for it in the MAG data.

So, now please answer my question:
please explain in your own words what a diamagnetic cavity is, and why it would accelerate ion and/or electrons (or is this another fañcy word tnat you just learned?).

But apparently you have no idea what you are talking about.

 

[tusenfem]

Originally Posted by Sol88 View Post


but we have me 'ol mate!...but

You, Tusenfem, and your team are somewhat surprised that a sublimating dirtysnowball could produce oscillations in a non magnetised comet, why's that?

Wouldn't a double layer be EXPECTED (page 5, Section B to "sing"?

you have the data on the double layer/s that surround 67P why would you hide it?

What do you think makes the oscillations then, Tusenfem?


and your the man to goto LINK, any papers coming out in the singing comet soon?

The paper on the singing comet has been accepted, I am not sure how long it will still take to appear online. It is in Annales Geophysicae, which is an open access journal, so anyone can get it.

But no there is no double layer, the newly formed ions are accelerated by the motional electric field of the solar wind: E = -v x B. This is not a double layer field, because that is created by charge separation. The accelerated ions are not yet magnetized, and therefore constitute a cross-field current, which is unstable for various wave modes, one of which is exactly the singing, read all about it in the soon to be published paper by Richter et al. in Annales Geophysicae.

And by the way this has been explained already three times or so, maybe you can try to remember the answers that people give you. At least that courtesy you can do us, when you are never answering any of the questions that we give you.

And yes I guess I would be the one for double layers, however, as the are not measured they are hard to hide.

 

[Sol88]

That is what I am asking YOU, Sol88. I know what the properties are/will be. And actually this is the time that, according to predictions, that the cavity should be measured. I am sure my colleagues in Braunschweig are looking for it in the MAG data.

So, now please answer my question:
please explain in your own words what a diamagnetic cavity is, and why it would accelerate ion and/or electrons (or is this another fañcy word tnat you just learned?).

But apparently you have no idea what you are talking about.

Got me there Tusenfem, please tell me (and the lurkers) about the diamagnetic cavity surrounding a comet all I could find was this LINK

but please also tell me and the lurkers why there would not be a double layer surrounding the nucleus?

 

[Sol88]

Eh? It's already been shown that the solar wind proton flux is a minimum of 10^7 times too low to be responsible for H2O production if you have it combining with OH-.
So, now you want a flux that is only 10% of the solar wind proton flux to be responsible for combining with OH+ to give H2O?
That means increasing the flux to 10^8 times it measured value. Of course, that is a massive underestimate. You're expecting, as Tusenfem mentions above, every single ion to combine and form H2O. That won't happen. Not with a solar wind speed of ~400 km/s. Not sure it could happen at all at those speeds, Tusenfem would know better. Either way, very few of those ions are going to combine with anything. That means jacking up the required flux by 2,3,4.......? orders of magnitude.
So a solar wind ion flux of, what, 10^12 times the measured value? And Tusenfem and his mates haven't noticed that? Dream on. Might be a convincing argument on thunderdolts, but I'd leave the science to the scientists, if I were you. And the maths.

well are you assuming a cross section of the comet is the only thing collecting protons?

Have you taken into account the cometosheath (Double layers) size?

 

[Sol88]

Another separate issue under analysis is that one of the two transmission units of the lander appears not to be working properly, in addition to the fact that one of the two receiving units is damaged.

Philae is programmed to switch periodically back and forth between these two transmission units, and after tests on the ground reference model, the team has sent a command to the lander to make it work with just one transmitter. As Philae is able to receive and accept commands of this kind in the “blind”, it should execute it as soon as it is supplied with solar energy during the comet’s day.

LINK

The presence of unexpected electric fields within the coma and/or close to the comet nucleus, possibly even disrupting the anticipated landing on the surface. This could occur on or after touch down because the sharp metallic edges of the spacecraft make an ideal focus for a diffuse plasma discharge, which would disrupt communications and possibly interfere with spacecraft electronics.

LINKYlink

Mmmmm.....is that ANOTHER prediction confirmed??? Seems the EU mob are doing very well for knowing squat!

 

[Sol88]

Why don't you start with actually showing any shred of evidence for the electric currents needed for the EU / EC theories first before going nit-picking on details?

Hint: Such currents have never been shown. Ever. Anywhere in the solar system.

What?

As Io circles around Jupiter and through the plasma torus, an enormous electrical current flows between them. Approximately 2 trillion watts of power is generated.

So why not between a comet and the ELECTRIC sun?

 

[Sol88]

What is this idiotic obsession with cliffs about? You have far bigger problems than that. Such as not a scrap of evidence to support this lunatic idea you subscribe to. For what it's worth:
"Interestingly, and as also observed by Deep Impact, most of the jets could be traced back to an apparently eroding terraced scarp that surrounds the smoothed terrain. This activity indicates that the scarp is actively eroding..............the height of one terraced scarp was determined to be 50m, and it was found that the scarp morphology at the boundaries varies across the surface. Some scarp edges were found to be sharp, some were concave, some were terraced, and others were scalloped...........Comparison of images taken by Deep Impact with images from Stardust-NExT revealed significant changes in the morphology along one scarp of a smooth terrain; in at least two places, this scarp receded by up to 50m during the cometary year between 2005 and 2011."
http://eu.wiley.com/WileyCDA/WileyTitle/productCd-3527412816.html

"Scalloped" and "concave" surfaces would probably fit the bill for forming jets, as indeed would any surface that wasn't completely smooth, but had constraints, like ridges within the scarp. This wouldn't constrain the gas, but would collimate the dust, which is mostly what we are seeing.

I suggest you also read that in conjunction with "Geologic control of jet formation on Comet 103P/Hartley 2"
http://planetary.brown.edu/pdfs/4623.pdf

The people who write this stuff have probably forgotten more about comets than Thornhill and Talbott ever knew.

What is this idiotic obsession with cliffs about? are you calling Holger Sierks an idiot? not nice mate, pull your socks up

because the MAN (Holger Sierks) has said and I quote

“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.”

So my main interest along with plenty of others is the "jets" that's where the "proof" comets are electric!

.....and we only need to a picture!

 

[tusenfem]

Got me there Tusenfem, please tell me (and the lurkers) about the diamagnetic cavity surrounding a comet all I could find was this LINK

but please also tell me and the lurkers why there would not be a double layer surrounding the nucleus?

Nice try, Sol88, you make an idiotic claim about electrons/protons which have to be accelerated in the diamagnetic cavity, and it is up to others to explain it all to you?

That is a game I don't play, because any answer I will give will not be accepted by you anyway.

Sorry lurkers, if you want to know more please contact me (here or in pm) and I will say more, but I am finished with Sol88's guessing-and-wild-claims game.

Sol88 put your money where your mouth is, and explain to us the electric nature of comets please.

 

[tusenfem]

So why not between a comet and the ELECTRIC sun?

I am sure you will explain it to us in full detail.
#PYMWYMI

 

[jonesdave116]

What is this idiotic obsession with cliffs about? are you calling Holger Sierks an idiot? not nice mate, pull your socks up

because the MAN (Holger Sierks) has said and I quote

So my main interest along with plenty of others is the "jets" that's where the "proof" comets are electric!

.....and we only need to a picture!

Sorry, you're still talking complete garbage. There isn't one single bit of evidence for anything electrical happening on this comet. Nowt. How would electrical activity create water? From rock? Within a metre of the surface? Idiotic. What temperature would that require, just to produce O? Why are there no temperature anomalies?
There is almost certainly no solar wind interacting with the surface now, just as seen at Halley and other comets. So you can't even use Thornhill's brainless explanation that it is all happening in the tail to produce OH.
You still can't explain the density. You still can't explain the porosity. And you still can't explain where all the water is coming from, including, 10 years on, why it came out of the innards of Tempel 1.
And you still have not a jot of evidence to support the idiotic schoolboy notion that you believe in.

 

[jonesdave116]

What is this idiotic obsession with cliffs about? are you calling Holger Sierks an idiot? not nice mate, pull your socks up

because the MAN (Holger Sierks) has said and I quote

So my main interest along with plenty of others is the "jets" that's where the "proof" comets are electric!

.....and we only need to a picture!

No, it isn't proof of anything. There would need to be a temperature anomaly, and indications of electrical activity on the comet for any "proof" of electric woo. And you still can't explain how electrical activity produces water.
You are still batting zero.

 

[jonesdave116]

LINK

LINKYlink

Mmmmm.....is that ANOTHER prediction confirmed??? Seems the EU mob are doing very well for knowing squat!

No, it isn't. And you still know squat.

 

[jonesdave116]

What are you saying? ... that The Institute of Science in Society (ISIS) is worse than the AGW Alarmists ! OMG !

Nope, they are the real loons

"The institute is on the Quackwatch list of questionable organizations."

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mae-Wan_Ho

Tells us all we need to know.

 

[Sol88]

Nice try, Sol88, you make an idiotic claim about electrons/protons which have to be accelerated in the diamagnetic cavity, and it is up to others to explain it all to you?

That is a game I don't play, because any answer I will give will not be accepted by you anyway.

Sorry lurkers, if you want to know more please contact me (here or in pm) and I will say more, but I am finished with Sol88's guessing-and-wild-claims game.

Sol88 put your money where your mouth is, and explain to us the electric nature of comets please.

In the double layer YOU know is there, not in the diamagnetic cavity.

and very much look forward to your paper.

and whilst you may not "play the game" you could answer, if you know, why is there no double layer around 67P and how would you detect it with the current suite of instruments onboard Rosetta?

All the elements are there, are they not?

Why go over it again, Haig posted numerous links in the subject but here it is again The Electric Comet (Full Documentary)

Knock yourself out!

 

[Sol88]

Whilst on the "jets"

“We see jets arising from the fractured areas of the walls inside the pits. These fractures mean that volatiles trapped under the surface can be warmed more easily and subsequently escape into space,” says Jean-Baptiste Vincent from the Max Planck Institute for Solar System Research, lead author of the study.

LINK

but Holger Sierks says

“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.”

Why not mention it in the story?

Same reason they didn't mention the receding "ice cliffs" on Tempel 1 just the insignificant frosting

We report the direct detection of solid water ice deposits exposed on the surface of comet 9P/Tempel 1, as observed by the Deep Impact mission. Three anomalously colored areas are shown to include water ice on the basis of their near-infrared spectra, which include diagnostic water ice absorptions at wavelengths of 1.5 and 2.0 micrometers. These absorptions are well modeled as a mixture of nearby non-ice regions and 3 to 6% water ice particles 10 to 50 micrometers in diameter. These particle sizes are larger than those ejected during the impact experiment, which suggests that the surface deposits are loose aggregates. The total area of exposed water ice is substantially less than that required to support the observed ambient outgassing from the comet, which likely has additional source regions below the surface.

LINK

Just look at this image of observed water ice

Photo credit: NASA.

Image Credit:NASA/JPL-Caltech/Cornell
Comparison of Deep Impact and Stardust photos of a smooth elevated feature on the surface of the nucleus showing recession of icy cliffs at the margins.

Why were the "recession of icy cliffs" not shown? oversight?

 

[Sol88]

No, it isn't. And you still know squat.

Yes it is! and I can smell bovine excrement a mile away

Not my problem if you wish to follow the sheeple in the face of contradictory evidence such as the recession of icy cliffs, which are the driver of the activity, (but the driving activity is cliffs.) as stated by Holger Sierks, OSIRIS principle investigator.

See the post above and explain that

......again