Merged The Electric Comet Theory Part III/SAFIRE

[Dancing David]

I don't know.

Same token, why do some asteroids show comas DD?

Because they are comets, not asteroids and they are made out of frozen volatilies not rock.

The EC hypothesis would say that Apollo objects should all show comas.

 

[Sol88]

Because they are comets, not asteroids and they are made out of frozen volatilies not rock.

The EC hypothesis would say that Apollo objects should all show comas.

Interesting!

 

[Sol88]

Because they are comets, not asteroids and they are made out of frozen volatilies not rock.

The EC hypothesis would say that Apollo objects should all show comas.

Curiouser and curiouser

3. DISCUSSION
Processes invoked to explain mass loss from asteroids include sublimation of near surface ice, electrostatic levitation of dust, impact, and rotational instability (Jewitt 2012). The orbit of P5 lies near the inner edge of the asteroid belt, in the vicinity of the Flora family of S-type asteroids. These objects have been associated with the LL chondrites, which themselves reflect metamorphism to temperatures ~800°C to 960°C (Keil 2000). As such, P5 is an unlikely carrier of water ice, and sublimation is unlikely to account for the observed activity. Neither is it likely that P5 could be a comet captured from the Kuiper Belt or Oort Cloud comet reservoirs; numerical simulations show that such capture is effectively impossible in the modern solar system (Fernández et al. 2002). Impact is another potential source of dust in the asteroid belt. However, the five month age spread of the dust tails (Table 3) and the absence of fading in the photometry (Table 2) both argue strongly against impact as a plausible explanation for the activity in P5.

The surviving hypothesis is that P5 is a body showing rotational mass-shedding, presumably from torques imposed by solar radiation.

??

What's your take DD? do you accept the surviving hypothesis? Or would you be willing to entertain alternative hypotheses?


Tell what I'd put my money on, Electrostatic forces on grains near asteroids and comets Christine Hartzell and Dylan Carter

In addition to cohesion, grains on small bodies will be influenced by electrostatic forces. Asteroids typically do not have magnetic fields. Thus, the surface of an asteroid interacts directly with the solar wind plasma and the solar UV radiation. The solar wind plasma tends to charge surfaces negatively. However, the solar UV radiation causes the regolith to photoemit, producing a net positive charge on the day-lit surfaces of the asteroid. The positively charged surface attracts electrons, resulting in a region of increased electron density near the surface called the plasma sheath. The plasma sheath serves to shield the charged asteroid surface from the free-stream plasma that has an electric potential of zero. Plasma sheaths are frequently studied experimentally in a variety of plasma physics applications. The charge separation in the plasma e-mail: [email protected] sheath causes an electric field, which points away from the surface on the day-side [2, 3]. On the night side, there is a plasma wake due to the higher mass of the ions than the electrons, which also causes an electric field [4]. The plasma environment has been measured at the Moon by the ARTEMIS mission and at comet ChuryumovGerasimenko by the ROSETTA mission, however, these measurements have been confined to regions outside of the near-surface plasma sheath.

You could always ask the expert, Tusenfem, on plasma sheaths or even 'double layers'!

 

[tusenfem]

You could always ask the expert, Tusenfem, on plasma sheaths or even 'double layers'!

HUH?
Can anyone give me a summary what this discussion is about?

 

[Dancing David]

But what they did find was wow how long do you have to go to university to work that out!

Come up noth sometime during a cold winter and try drilling through ice at sub zero temperatures.

You denial and ignorance are showing, same tired old blather.

It has been shown in prior threads that sub zero ice (water ice) can be as hard as hard rock

 

[Dancing David]

So how does the h2o, co2, co gas sublimating under a very good thermally insulating dust granular layer to do its thing thru something as hard as rock ice?

Easy, ice can be as hard as rock and sublimate, you have been down this road before.

Why can't you actually show that comets carry an electrical charge sufficient to create a coma?

That would win the Nobel prize.

 

[Reality Check]

Sol88: I did not answer an ignorant and deluded derail

So no coherent answer from Reality Check.:

21 August 2017 Sol88: I did not answer an ignorant and deluded derail.
But since you insist on documenting even more ignorance and delusions about comets I will answer.

• Consolidated material is ices and dust collecting under gravitation with cohesive forces keeping them together.
• The description "rock-like" is the visual appearance of ices and dust collected in consolidated materials on comets.
• Sol88's 8 year long delusions of comets are rock, etc. raises their inane head yet again.

21 August 2017 Sol88: Mentions "nucleus bulk density" that shows how completly insane the comets are rock, etc. delusions are!
The nucleus bulk density of comets is less than that of water as measured for over 60 years as Sol88 knows !

 

[Reality Check]

Sol88: "Interesting" ignorance - main belt comets debunk his comets are rock delusion

Interesting!

21 August 2017 Sol88: "Interesting" ignorance because main-belt comets show that his comets are rocks delusions are just that!
According to your delusions, the only bodies that can be comets are ones coming from the other system to the inner system. Main-belt comets cannot exist in your ignorant and deluded dogma !

On the other hand, there is the real world. In the real world ices sublimate within the snow line (about 5 AU). Asteroids may have ices. These ices can be exposed making some main-belt asteroids into temporary comets.

 

[Reality Check]

Sol88: "Curiouser" ignorance - main belt comets debunk his comets are rock delusion

Curiouser and curiouser

21 August 2017 Sol88: "Curiouser" ignorance because main-belt comets show that his comets are rocks delusions are just that!

21 August 2017 Sol88: Inane lying about real science that is not his comets are rocks, etc. delusions.
He lies by highlighting text irrelevant to his delusions and quote mining.
THE EXTRAORDINARY MULTI-TAILED MAIN-BELT COMET P/2013 P5

3. DISCUSSION
Processes invoked to explain mass loss from asteroids include sublimation of near surface ice, electrostatic levitation of dust, impact, and rotational instability (Jewitt 2012). The orbit of P5 lies near the inner edge of the asteroid belt, in the vicinity of the Flora family of S-type asteroids. These objects have been associated with the LL chondrites, which themselves reflect metamorphism to temperatures ~800°C to 960°C (Keil 2000). As such, P5 is an unlikely carrier of water ice, and sublimation is unlikely to account for the observed activity. Neither is it likely that P5 could be a comet captured from the Kuiper Belt or Oort Cloud comet reservoirs; numerical simulations show that such capture is effectively impossible in the modern solar system (Fernández et al. 2002). Impact is another potential source of dust in the asteroid belt. However, the five month age spread of the dust tails (Table 3) and the absence of fading in the photometry (Table 2) both argue strongly against impact as a plausible explanation for the activity in P5.
The surviving hypothesis is that P5 is a body showing rotational mass-shedding, presumably from torques imposed by solar radiation...

 

[Reality Check]

Sol88: A lie about Jewitt et. al.

Tell what I'd put my money on,

21 August 2017 Sol88: A lie about Jewitt et. al.
THE EXTRAORDINARY MULTI-TAILED MAIN-BELT COMET P/2013 P5 list electrostatic levitation of dust and exclude it in the text Sol88 does not quote !

The surviving hypothesis is that P5 is a body showing rotational mass-shedding, presumably from torques imposed by solar radiation.

 

[Reality Check]

Can anyone give me a summary what this discussion is about?

This is Sol88 showing his ignorance yet again by not knowing that main-belt comets are nothing to do with his delusions about comets. Their existence even debunks his delusions because they do not have cometary orbits and the activity can even be unrelated to the orbit, e.g. impacts exposing ices.

Aside from that there is some interesting science about the causes of asteroids becoming temporary comets. The Active Asteroids by Dave Jewitt (one of the authors of the cited paper) lists them

Some asteroids eject dust, unexpectedly producing transient, comet-like comae and tails. First ascribed to the sublimation of near-surface water ice, mass losing asteroids (also called "main-belt comets") can in fact be driven by a surprising diversity of mechanisms. In this paper, we consider eleven dynamical asteroids losing mass, in nine of which the ejected material is spatially resolved. We address mechanisms for producing mass loss including rotational instability, impact ejection, electrostatic repulsion, radiation pressure sweeping, dehydration stresses and thermal fracture, in addition to the sublimation of ice. In two objects (133P and 238P) the repetitive nature of the observed activity leaves ice sublimation as the only reasonable explanation while, in a third ((596) Scheila), a recent impact is the cause. Another impact may account for activity in P/2010 A2 but this tiny object can also be explained as having shed mass after reaching rotational instability. Mass loss from (3200) Phaethon is probably due to cracking or dehydration at extreme (~1000 K) perihelion temperatures, perhaps aided by radiation pressure sweeping. For the other bodies, the mass loss mechanisms remain unidentified, pending the acquisition of more and better data. While the active asteroid sample size remains small, the evidence for an astonishing diversity of mass loss processes in these bodies is clear.

I have highlighted the evidence of ices sublimating creating 2 of the main-belt comets.

 

[Dancing David]

Interesting!

Funny how out of all the bodies in the asteroid belt on 5 have comas... fail for your theory

 

[Sol88]

Dup

 

[Sol88]

Because they are comets, not asteroids and they are made out of frozen volatilies not rock.

The EC hypothesis would say that Apollo objects should all show comas.

Thumbs down Sol88:A lie of "looks like the bulk density has got you mob stumped!"
Originally Posted by Sol88 View Post
...
Usual stuff:
15 August 2017 Sol88: A lie of "looks like the bulk density has got you mob stumped!" when it is you has the delusion that comets are rocks and their bulk density is measured to be less than that of water.
The bulk density of comets has been measured for over 67 years and stumps no one who can read which is what makes the statement into a lie.

15 August 2017 Sol88: An ignorant delusion about the MUPUS-PEN calibration in the lab being what MUPUS detected on 67P.
This is basic science. We have an instrument. We want to use it to make measurements of a property. We calibrate that instrument using materials with already known properties. For example, we might calibrate a thermometer by looking at what it reads with ice and with boiling water. Using that thermometer to measure the temperature of a person does not make them into ice or boiling water !
Table 1. PEN hammer calibration data is the calibration of the hammer against materials with already known properties.
The
15 August 2017 Sol88: Repeating his delusions that comets are rocks, etc.

15 August 2017 Sol88: The idiocy that a "sintered near-surface microporous dust-ice layer with a porosity of 30 to 65%" = bulk density.

A homogeneous nucleus for comet 67P/Churyumov– Gerasimenko from its gravity field.
M. Pätzold1, T. andert2, M. Hahn1, S. W. asmar3, J.-P. barriot4, M. K. bird1, b. Häusler2, K. Peter1, S. Tellmann1, e. Grün5, P. r. Weissman6, H. Sierks7, L. Jorda8, r. Gaskell6, f. Preusker9 & f. Scholten9



Geomorphology of comet 67P/Churyumov–Gerasimenko
Samuel P. D. Birch,1‹ Y. Tang,2 A. G. Hayes,1,2 R. L. Kirk,3 D. Bodewits,4 H. Campins,5 Y. Fernandez,5 R. de Freitas Bart,2 N. W. Kutsop,2 H. Sierks,6
J. M. Soderblom,7 S. W. Squyres1,2 and J-B. Vincent6,8

Surface changes on comet 67P/Churyumov-Gerasimenko suggest a more active past B. Davidsson,5 X. Hu,6 S. F. Hviid,7 J. Knollenberg,7 C. Güttler,6 C. Tubiana,6
S. Fornasier,8 C. Feller,8 P. Hasselmann,8 J.-B. Vincent,7 H. Sierks,6 C. Barbieri,9
P. Lamy,10 R. Rodrigo,11,12 D. Koschny,13 H. U. Keller,7,14 H. Rickman,15,16
M. F. A’Hearn,17 M. A. Barucci,8 J.-L. Bertaux,18 I. Bertini,9 S. Besse,13 D. Bodewits,17 G. Cremonese,19 V. Da Deppo,20 S. Debei,21 M. De Cecco,22 J. Deller,6
J. D. P. Deshapriya,8 M. Fulle,23 P. J. Gutierrez,24 M. Hofmann,6 W.-H. Ip,25 L. Jorda,3 G. Kovacs,6 J.-R. Kramm,6 E. Kührt,7 M. Küppers,13 L. M. Lara,24 M. Lazzarin,9
Z.-Yi Lin,25 J. J. Lopez Moreno,24 S. Marchi,26 F. Marzari,9 S. Mottola,7
G. Naletto,20,27,28 N. Oklay,7 A. Pommerol,1 F. Preusker,7 F. Scholten,7 X. Shi6


Tell you what, have a bit of a read and see what ya reckon, Dancing David, Reality Check.

 

[Reality Check]

Sol88: The idiocy of citing papers on comets made of ices and dust

Tell you what, have a bit of a read and see what ya reckon, Dancing David, Reality Check.

Easy:
22 August 2017 Sol88: The idiocy of citing papers on comets made of ices and dust in a thread about his comet delusions, e.g. they are rocks.

 

[Sol88]

Easy:
22 August 2017 Sol88: The idiocy of citing papers on comets made of ices and dust in a thread about his comet delusions, e.g. they are rocks.

Are they?

Do you agree they are homogeneous on large scales?
Do you agree they are highly porous up to 75%?
Do you also agree the "dust" is very similar to Carbonaceous chondritic meteorites?

 

[Reality Check]

Sol88: Repeats the idiocy of citing papers on comets made of ices and dust

Are they?

Yes so:
22 August 2017 Sol88: Repeats the idiocy of citing papers on comets made of ices and dust in a thread about his comet delusions, e.g. they are rocks.
It gets worse:
22 August 2017 Sol88: A double delusion that comets are only dust and that dust is "very similar to Carbonaceous chondritic meteorites".
Comets are dust and ices. No cited measurement of the composition of dust.

ETA: Composition of comet Halley dust particles from VEGA observations

The first direct measurements of the physical and chemical properties of cometary dust, obtained by the dust impact mass analyzer aboard Vega 1 and 2 studying comet Halley, are discussed. Particles of mass less than 10 to the -14th g are much more abundant than was predicted by models. Most of the particles are rich in light elements such as H, C, N, and O, lending support to models that describe cometary material as consisting of radiation-processed ices. Three examples of mass spectra for typical particle compositions are shown.

Composition of comet Halley dust particles from Giotto observations

Mass spectra of cometary dust particles measured by the PIA dust particle analyzer aboard the Giotto spacecraft show some unexpected and striking features. First, small particles below 10 to the -14th g are much more abundant than anticipated by models. Second, most of the particles are rich in light elements such as H, C, N, and O, suggesting the validity of models that describe the cometary dust as including organic material. Third, the light elements specifically seem to have a low ratio of mass to volume. Three examples of original mass spectra showing typical compositions are given; these have been measured, and are compared with a computer-simulated mass spectrum.

Isotopic Compositions of Cometary Matter Returned by Stardust

Hydrogen, carbon, nitrogen, and oxygen isotopic compositions are heterogeneous among comet 81P/Wild 2 particle fragments; however, extreme isotopic anomalies are rare, indicating that the comet is not a pristine aggregate of presolar materials. Nonterrestrial nitrogen and neon isotope ratios suggest that indigenous organic matter and highly volatile materials were successfully collected. Except for a single 17O-enriched circumstellar stardust grain, silicate and oxide minerals have oxygen isotopic compositions consistent with solar system origin. One refractory grain is 16O-enriched, like refractory inclusions in meteorites, suggesting that Wild 2 contains material formed at high temperature in the inner solar system and transported to the Kuiper belt before comet accretion.

Refractory and semi-volatile organics at the surface of comet 67P/Churyumov-Gerasimenko: Insights from the VIRTIS/Rosetta imaging spectrometer
Comet 67P/Churyumov-Gerasimenko: Close-up on Dust Particle Fragments

The sodium to iron elemental ratio is enriched with regard to abundances in CI carbonaceous chondrites by a factor from ˜1.5 to ˜15. No clear evidence for organic matter has been identified. The composition and morphology of the collected dust particles appear to be similar to that of interplanetary dust particles.

 

[Reality Check]

Sol88: Why are all main-belt asteroids not comets according to your comet delusions

Back to the subject of the thread:
Questions with deafening silence emphasizing the complete uselessness of the comets are rocks delusion.

1. 14 August 2017 Sol88: Comets are rocks so where did that rock come from?
2. 18 August 2017 Sol88: What is your predicted composition of comets from their origins?
3. 18 August 2017 Sol88: What is your predicted density of comets?
4. 18 August 2017 Sol88: What is the measured density of comets?
5. 18 August 2017 Sol88: State the physics that explains any density difference showing that the measurements are matched.

If you want main-belt comets to support your comet delusions then answer:
22 August 2017 Sol88: Why are all main-belt asteroids not comets according to your comet delusions?

 

[Reality Check]

Sol88: Why are all asteroids with cometary obits not comets

And a blast from the past!
22 August 2017 Sol88: Why are all asteroids with cometary obits not comets as in your comet delusions?

Electric comets still do not exist!
EC predicts that 100,000's of asteroids should be comets !

 

[Sol88]

Cometary nuclei consist mostly of dust and water ice1. Previous observations have found nuclei to be low-density and highly porous bodies2–4, but have only moderately constrained the range of allowed densities because of the measurement uncertainties. Here we report the precise mass, bulk density, porosity and internal structure of the nucleus of comet 67P/Churyumov–Gerasimenko on the basis of its gravity field. The mass and gravity field are derived from measured spacecraft velocity perturbations at fly-by distances between 10 and 100 kilometres. The gravitational point mass is GM = 666.2 ± 0.2 cubic metres per second squared, giving a mass M = (9,982 ± 3) × 109 kilograms. Together with the current estimate of the volume of the nucleus5, the average bulk density of the nucleus is 533 ± 6 kilograms per cubic metre. The nucleus appears to be a low-density, highly porous (72–74 per cent) dusty body, similar to that of comet 9P/Tempel 12,3. The most likely composition mix has approximately four times more dust than ice by mass and two times more dust than ice by volume. We conclude that the interior of the nucleus is homogeneous and constant in density on a global scale without large voids. The high porosity seems to be an inherent property of the nucleus material.

A homogeneous nucleus for comet 67P/Churyumov– Gerasimenko from its gravity field

But

ABSTRACT
We present a global geomorphological map of comet 67P/Churyumov–Gerasimenko (67P/C- G) using data acquired by the Rosetta Orbiter’s OSIRIS Narrow Angle Camera. The images used in our study were acquired between 2014 August and 2015 May, before 67P/C-G passed through perihelion. Imagery of the Southern hemisphere was included in our study, allowing us to compare the contrasting hemispheres of 67P/C-G in a single study. Our work also puts into greater context the morphologies studied in previous works, and also the morphologies observed on previously visited cometary nuclei. Relative to other nuclei, 67P/C-G appears most similar to 81P/Wild 2, with a topographically heterogeneous surface dominated by smooth-floored pits. Our mapping describes the landscapes of 67P/C-G when they were first observed by Rosetta, and our map can be used to detect changes in surface morphologies after its perihelion passage. Our mapping reveals strong latitudinal dependences for emplaced units and a highly heterogeneous surface. Layered bedrock units that represent the exposed nucleus of 67P/C-G are dominant at southern latitudes, while topographically smooth, dust covered regions dominate the Northern hemisphere. Equatorial latitudes are dominated by smooth terrain units that show evidence for flow structures. We observe no obvious differences between the comet’s two lobes, with the only longitudinal variations being the Imhotep and Hatmehit basins. These correlations suggest a strong seasonal forcing on the surface evolution of 67P/C- G, where materials are transported from the Southern hemisphere to Northern hemisphere basins over multiple orbital time-scales.

Geomorphology of comet 67P/Churyumov–Gerasimenko

Bedrock?? Like as if in bedrock?

You think they say what they mean and call it compressed dust with some ice!

Why would they call it bedrock, like in this context...

The surface of 67P/C-G is generally broken into rough and smooth terrains (e.g. Auger et al. 2015; La Forgia et al. 2015; Giacomini et al. 2016; Pajola et al. 2016b). The rough terrain is predominantly exposed bedrock, while the smooth terrain repre- sents disaggregated, transported remnants of formerly consolidated bedrock (Sierks et al. 2015).

Further...

3.1.1 Interpretation
The cliffs represent the exposed, underlying bedrock of the comet nucleus. Regions with high slopes mark locations subjected to sub- limation induced erosion and scarp retreat. Talus deposits at their base suggest collapse and back-wasting of the cliff face. The cliffs (primarily the low-sloping cliffs) are also most prominent at south- ern latitudes, which are the latitudes most illuminated during per- ihelion. This suggests that granular materials are removed from southern latitudes at perihelion with the underlying structures now exposed. Simultaneously, the topography is bevelled at these lattudes, giving rise to the somewhat lower sloping cliffs. The bedrock of the nucleus is thus more exposed at southern latitudes, while the Northern hemisphere retains its granular covering.

So what kinda of bedrock do you think they are talking about, reality check, Dancing David?

Bedrock; Geology. unbroken solid rock, overlaid in most places by soil or rock fragments.

Astronomy;. unbroken solid fluffy rock, overlaid in most places by soil fluffy dust or rock granular fragments.??