The Electric Comet theory

[tusenfem]

Would you think it would be possible to retract that statement, Tusenfem?

no

 

[Sol88]

wow, your text from 2009!!
and i guess you have forgotten that we have discussed water creation in silicates by the solar wind on the moon, the process is not the big problem, the production RATE is.

No, Tusenfem you have never said anything of the sort.

You denied it.

you asked

Just show me, Sol88 qualitative and quantitative how this is supposed to work. Not just tiny quotes from press releases, but the whole thingamajik.

Charging of the comet nucleus
EDM on a singly charged nucleus
Release of oxygen ions (most likely positively charged)
Reaction with the solar wind protons (also positively charged, possibly highly energetic)

Please show in detail that the amount of water group ions that is observed around a comet and in its tail can be produced by this mechanism.

Hoping to hear back from you soon with the math and chemical reactions to back yourself up.

Yours truly
Tusenfem

And you got shown!

Significance
Whether water is produced by solar wind (SW) radiolysis has been debated for more than four decades. In this paper, we exploit the high spatial resolution of electron microscopy and sensitivity of valence electron energy-loss spectroscopy to de- tect water (liquid or vapor) in vesicles within (SW-produced) space-weathered rims on interplanetary dust particle (IDP) surfaces. Water in the rims has implications for the origin of water on airless bodies like the Moon and asteroids, the de- livery of water to the surfaces of terrestrial planets, and the production of water in other astrophysical environments. In particular, water and organic carbon were likely delivered simultaneously by the high flux of IDPs accreted by the early Earth and other terrestrial planets.

Mmmmmmmmm......

Your truly
Sol88

 

[Sol88]

wow, your text from 2009!!
and i guess you have forgotten that we have discussed water creation in silicates by the solar wind on the moon, the process is not the big problem, the production RATE is.

So we can put this to bed for everyone benefit, Tusenfem?

Water and heavy water can be produced by sputtering from the solar wind!!

Yes or No, Tusenfem?

 

[W.D.Clinger]

You have to laugh

Yes, but we aren't all laughing at the same things.

First - Why did I bring Miles Mathis into this thread ? ...

Electric Comets requires an Electric Sun requires an Electric Universe / Plasma Cosmology ... it's a package deal they ALL go together

And Miles Mathis has a finger in ALL those Pi(s)

Yes, that's pretty funny.

Second - In my list of some the Space Greats ... Copernicus, Galileo, Newton, Einstein, Birkland, Bruce, Velikovsky, Alfvén, Juergens, Scott, Thornhill, Talbott, Mathis ...

The real question to ask is not whether anyone got anything wrong, but whether they got anything right. Bruce, Velikovsky, Juergens, Scott, Thornhill, Talbott, and Mathis are batting 0.

Let's give Haig credit for knowing Bruce, Velikovsky, Scott, Thornhill, and Talbott belong in the same sentence with Miles Mathis.

What's funny is he thought Copernicus, Galileo, Newton, Einstein, Birkeland, and Alfvén belonged in the same sentence with Miles Mathis.

I don't see a problem with Mathis's logic, reasoning or math and he is right to point to the "holes" in mainstream dogma.

It does require a certain degree of mathematical sophistication to realize pi is not actually equal to 4...

...just as it requires a considerable degree of scientific illiteracy to believe Copernicus, Galileo, Newton, and Einstein should be grouped with one of the more prolific crackpots of our generation.

 

[Haig]

You're acting like you know a lot about the differences between Electric Comet sparks and EDM sparks. Funny to hear you say that, given that Mr. Ransom keeps publishing these "papers" telling us the opposite---that spark damage photos look precisely like crater photos.

Hey, I have an idea! Why don't you tell us exactly what process you think is being applied to the comet?

What voltage? (More generally, what potential field?)
What current, for how much time? Driven by what impedance?
In what residual gas pressure and species?

Take your time, I'll wait.

Well ben m, you seem to be getting a little rattled ... are things not going your way ?

Let's wait for more results from Electric Comet 67P before doing the math / qualitative / quantitative thing again ... You need data to do sums right ? Maybe when the Rosetta team decide to give us some more stuff an pics

Could be by them the The SAFIRE Project and JMP®: What Makes Our Sun Shine? will have more data too, after a great start in the first of three phases. Don't you think ?

Until then could you do something for me?

Look at this PIC of un-named comets and asteroids and say if they LOOK very different or the same ?

Now don't cheat and look at the pics and quote below !
.
.
.
.
.




mainstream blog on comets and asteroids

all of our recent spacecraft flybys have shown that the comet nucleus is in fact dark and hot – and even when active, this activity is confined to only a small fraction of the surface. In fact the images of inactive comets and asteroids are so similar that you would be hard pressed to tell the difference from a picture alone. This of course raises the question of whether or not there really are two distinct classes of object, asteroids and comets

[url=http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/vbimghost.php?do=displayimg&imgid=30414][/URL]
LARGE VIEW

Interesting how hard it is to tell comets and asteroids apart before the "active" stage ... Tell me what the difference mainstream think there actually is again ?

How does Lutetia compare to the other asteroids and comets visited by spacecraft?


Comets Impact Cosmology

Left. The closest image of Comet Wild 2. The bright spot mentioned can be seen near the terminator in the 11.00 o'clock position. Other bright spots can be seen at the edges of depressions. We are seeing the electric discharge machining (EDM) of the nucleus of Comet Wild 2 in progress. Right is a scanning electron microscope view of a surface that has been exposed to EDM in the lab. The same process is occurring constantly on Io where the cathode arcs were also seen to be eroding crater edges.

“Because they constitute an electric current, the [cathode] jet streams will remain separate and coherent over vast distances. Comet Hyakutake’s tail was detected by the Ulysses spacecraft half a billion kilometres away! Cometary filaments cannot be explained by outgassing. They are definitive evidence for the electrical nature of comets and the solar environment. The trajectory, velocity and filamentary nature of the comet’s ion tail conform to that known experimentally as a ‘plasma gun’.”

 

[rwguinn]

sorry but edm-"like" was never mentioned before, nor that jets were the actual edm-liking
seems like you're modifying your "model" on the go just to make it fit your misconceptions of real physics beit first or second approach nonsense.

Somewhat like Sol88 retreating from and ignoring his original "No water found..." stance...

 

[Haig]

i don't know haigy, why not ask you ec fantasy friends at thunderdolts who claim edm is producing water somehow

I'm surprised you don't know tusenfem

David Talbott gave you the answer on this very thead ... HERE ... it's in the electrochemical factory of the Electric Comet COMA !!!

Have a look at these images of plasma sheaths ... notice the similarities ?











It turns out ALL the CHARGED bodies in our Solar system have Plasma Sheaths --- Electric Comets --- Planets --- Sun --- and the excess charge difference tries to equalise matters in anyway it can ... e.g. ...

Jets (Birkeland currents) to the (nucleus) of Comets e.g. ... Comet Holmes In The Electric Universe

Lightening (Birkeland currents) to the Planets (nucleus) e.g. ... The Balloon goes up over lightning!

Tufts (Birkeland currents) to the Sun (nucleus) e.g. ... The Electric Sun Hypothesis

Comets Impact Cosmology

Having described the solar electrical environment we can go on to answer the question posed earlier: “How can a comet exhibit electrical effects?” A comet’s tail arises from the interaction between the electric charge of the comet and the solar discharge plasma. The comet spends most of its time far from the Sun, where the plasma charge density and voltage with respect to the Sun is low. The comet moves slowly and it easily accumulates enough charge to balance the ambient voltage.

As the comet approaches the Sun, the nucleus moves at a furious speed through regions of increasing charge density and voltage. The comet’s surface charge and internal polarization, developed in deep space, respond to the new environment by forming cathode jets and a visible plasma sheath, or coma. The strong electric field in the comet”s plasma sheath generates x-rays. The cathode discharge hot spots characteristically jump about the nucleus, and the comet may shed and grow new tails. Or the comet may explode like an overstressed capacitor, breaking into separate fragments or simply giving up the ghost and disappearing. The ‘non-gravitational’ forces observed perturbing comet orbits are simply due to these electrical interactions.

 

[Haig]

Thanks Sol88 for that informative post on Mars electric dust devils HERE ... I'd forgotten about that phenomena and it "sparked" my memory on the varies ways charged bodies try to equalise the electrical potential in their Plasma Sheaths. that I'd read about on the EU / PC sites.

Burned by a Dust Devil

In Mars’ thin and dry atmosphere, dust devils are the equivalent of Earthly lightning. And they, too, leave behind a record of their passing burned into the soil.

The Case Of The Electric Martian Dust Devils

"If martian dust devils are highly electrified, as our research suggests, they might give rise to increased discharging or arcing in the low-pressure martian atmosphere, increased dust adhesion to space suits and equipment, and interference with radio communications," Farrell said.

"These martian dust devils dwarf the five-to-10 meter terrestrial ones, can be greater than 500 meters in diameter and several thousand meters high. The track patterns are known to change from season to season, so these huge dust pipes must be a large factor in transporting dust and could be responsible for eroding landforms," Smith said.

Also interesting to see how our variable Electric Sun has a direct and "current" effect on our little "charged" Earth ... Cosmic Ray Surge, GMOs | S0 News January 11, 2015

They can even predict the weather from our variable Electric Sun a 120 days ahead ... WeatherAction

Latest news 10 Jan 2015 WeatherAction News No 04 TOP STORM SUPERBLY FORECAST 120d ahead
The major storm which hit Britain + Ireland, espec Ire+Scot, confirmed WeatherAction LongRange forecast of 120d ahead & detailed maps+graphs 21d ahead. Top level Kp7 Geomag activity & an M6.6 Quake also confirmed WeatherAction Geophysical (trial) forecasts for Jan 8-12th+/-1d. TO MARK THIS SUCCESS GET WeatherAction Forecasts under upTo 2/3OFF 'Storming Offer' HomePage www.WeatherAction.com

 

[tusenfem]

So we can put this to bed for everyone benefit, Tusenfem?

Water and heavy water can be produced by sputtering from the solar wind!!

Yes or No, Tusenfem?

this has been dicussed, sol, about 50 pages back or so.
on the moon water is produced by this mechanism, but only something like a pint per several football fields, over rhe lifetime of the moon.
like said, show that you can produce at least as much water as comes from the early 67P, the one can maybe think about this mechanism.
but as now haig has pulled the plug from edm and turned it into edm-like in the second approach nonsense, sobwho cares.

 

[Haig]

Electric Comet Lovejoy is brightening interest

Comet Lovejoy Brightens

The recent activity of comet Lovejoy puts another dent in conventional comet theory. The “dirty snowball” hypothesis should be discarded in favor of electrical activity.

According to a recent press release, astronomers are surprised by the “unexpected brightening” of comet Lovejoy. Edwin Lovejoy discovered C/2014 Q2 on August 17, 2014, from Brisbane, Australia. It is a common theme among astronomers in recent years to refer to comets almost universally as “surprising” or “puzzling”. Why the confusion persists is because most scientists think of comets as icy bodies, with only a small percentage of rocky composition.

How To See Comet Lovejoy Tonight

Although the comet is beginning to recede from us, its intrinsic brightness should still be increasing a bit. That's because it doesn't reach perihelion (its closest to the Sun) until January 30th (at a rather distant 1.29 a.u. from the Sun). By that date the comet should finally be fading slightly from Earth's point of view. And in late January the Moon returns; it's first-quarter on the 26th.

Starwatch: comet Lovejoy becomes visible to the naked eye

The comet has not disappointed and, although not an impressive naked-eye object, it is probably now at its best. It shone near magnitude 4.5 as it swept closest to the Earth (70m km) on 7 January and is unlikely to dim much before the month’s end.

 

[Reality Check]

The EU / PC crowd look at a picture of Electric Comet 67P and see ROCK and you lot have a temper tantrum because we dare suggest it looks like ROCK.

No Haig: The EU / PC crowd ignorantly look at pictures of comets and see ROCK and we point out that this is ignorant and a fantasy because they ignorantly and deludingly say that IS ROCK BECASE IT WAS BLASTED OFF A PLANET IN A DELUSION .

Scientists and anyone who knows basic science use science (not blind faith in delusions) to determine that comets cannot be rock.

 

[Reality Check]

Thunderbolts ignorance and delusions about comets

What's the bright stuff or more correctly "stuff shining thru" at the jet source???

What "bright stuff or more correctly "stuff shining thru" at the jet source", Sol88?
Which paper or scientist are you quoting for "stuff shining thru"?
Please cite the scientific literature, not any Thunderbolts fantasies.

It is a lie to state that any of the ECH delusion has been confirmed by pictures of Tempel 1. None of the pictures are of rock. None of the pictures show electrical discharges. None of the pictures show electrical discharge machining.

Interesting bunch of ignorance and delusions here from a B Talbott.
* comet science has an explanation for the color of comet surfaces which is not delusions about ECM!
* surface ice has only been seen on one comet and so was not expected on 67P.
* multiple craters are expected on comets - given the billions of years and billions of comets and meteoroids, collisions are inevitable. Even the smaller moons have craters.
* the deluded cherry picking of a blob created in an electric arc.
* the delusion that inner system dust that was found in the Stardust mission means that comets formed there - "stardust" was also found !
* the almost lie of quoting scientists stating stuff was a surprise as if that was bad. That is how science progresses - through finding unexpected stuff that is unexpected.
* The idea that scientists will "arrive at the Electric Universe through the back door" is truly ignorant. Scientists know more about electromagnetism than the Thunderbolts people and include it in their scientific models where appropriate.

 

[Reality Check]

I think your correct, Paladinn17 and I believe that hit some thing harder than the instrument was designed for and to save face, they've played it safe and called it extremely hard sintered ice, like the stuff the snow plough leaves behind in winter.

That is correct, Sol88, I meant MUPUS and that it found a layer of ice that was harder than the designers were expecting. There is no "playing safe" since there is basic physics that says that it is ice.

The electric comet delusion has already failed abysmally because the measured density of comets is less than water. No rock has been detected on any comet.

Thunderbolt's predictions is a list of Thunderbolts fantasies based on the electric comet delusion.
A prediction can be tested, i.e. a prediction that something can be measured includes what will measure it which is totally lacking from that list ff fantasies .
A prediction is related to the theory, not made up out of thin air by someone ignorance about the science (Talbott is a mythologist!).
A prediction from a theory has to be distinguishable from any other theory. Thus a prediction of dust being moved around by electrostatic activity is useless because that is also a mainstream prediction.

 

[Reality Check]

The ignorance, delusions and lies in the Thunderbolts web site and videos

The 9 items in The ignorance, delusions and lies in the Thunderbolts web site and videos need updating.

10. 18 December 2014: The bad science and delusions in Newton’s Electric Clockwork Solar System by Wal Thornhill.
11. 5 January 2015: Argument form incredibility and maybe ignorance from the Thunderbolts team in a video about craters on 67P.
12. 5 January 2015: More Thunderbolts ignorance and fantasies in Jets of Comet 67P
13. 5 January 2015: Wal Thornhill makes up fantasies about comets
14. 6 January 2015: Thunderbolts "Exploring the Electric Universe" ignorance, lies and delusions
This is the confirmation that Thunderbolts are Velikovsky cranks and thus are by definition deluded since planets changing orbits to fit their fantasies is physically impossible.
15. 6 January 2015: Some ignorance on Donald E. Scott's web site
16. 7 January 2015: Fantasies and ignorance from Thunderbolts on plasma sheaths
17. 7 January 2015: Thunderbolts delusion about the ionosphere tail of Venus

As I have already noted: The electric comet idea is a fantasy (comets are not rocks!) based on Velikovsky's delusion from the 1950's (planets do not whizz around the solar system in via lotion of the laws of physics).

 

[Reality Check]

Yip Sol88, it's definitely much more in favour of the thunderbolts crowd,...

Wrong Haig and Sol88: The paper is actual science and not about the electric comet delusion.
Rosetta images of Comet 67P/Churyumov–Gerasimenko 1: Near-surface icy terrain similar to comet Tempel-1 Max Wallis1 and N. Chandra Wickramasinghe

The first 3 months of the Rosetta mission have given us remarkable pictures of comet 67P both from the orbiter and recently from the Philae lander in its brief days before running out of power. Though its crust is very black, four indicators of underlying icy morphology are evident. 67P has smooth, planar ‘seas’ (the largest 600 x 800m) and flat-bottomed craters, both features on comet Tempel-1. 67P’s surface is peppered with mega-boulders (10-70km) like comet Hartley-2, while parallel furrowed terrain is a new ice feature. The largest sea (‘Cheops’ sea, 600 x 800m) curves around one lobe of the 4km diameter comet and the crater lakes up to ~150m across are re-frozen water with organic-rich debris covered by sublimation lag of order 10-cm thick plus impact regolith. The parallel furrows relate to flexing of the asymmetric and spinning two-lobe body, which generates fractures in an underlying body of ice. The mega-boulders are hypothesised to arise from bolide impacts into ice: in the very low gravity, boulders ejected at a fraction of 1m/s would readily reach ~100m from the impact crater and could land perched on elevated surfaces. Where they stand proud, they indicate stronger refrozen terrain or that the surface they land on (and crush) sublimates more quickly. Outgassing due to ice-sublimation was already evident in September at 3.3AU, with surface temperature peaks of 220-230K, which implies impure ice mixtures with less strongly-bound H2O. Increasing sublimation as Rosetta follows comet 67P around its 1.3 AU perihelion will further reveal the nature and prevalence of near-surface ices.

is astronomers not being deluded enough to think
* that planets whizz around to fit cherry picked myths or
* that comets are rock.
This is astronomers pointing out that several of the surface features of 67P were also seen on Tempel 1 and Hartley-2 with a new feature of parallel furrowed terrain.

 

[Reality Check]

So, looks like rock, hard rock, has a make up like rock and is rocky like but not rock???

Wrong, Sol88. The images look like rock just as we would expect a body made of ice and dust in outer space to look like.

The "make up like rock" part is a fantasy. Comets are made up of ices and dust, not rock, as has been pointed out before.

Emphasizing the Thunderbolts ignorance about physics is good but aren't you supposed to be supporting them, Sol88 !

 

[Reality Check]

http://blogs.esa.int/rosetta/2014/12/18/updates-from-agu/

Other than the rather irrational demand at the end for some kind of apology from ESA, this is standard mainstream science.
For example 67P is covered in a dust containing Sodium, Magnesium, Zinc and Iron. These elements are only detected during nighttime observations and the reasonable conclusion is this is standard physics of spluttering of the dust from the solar wind and cosmic rays which would be shielded during the daytime by the outgassed material.

"Activity is directly correlated to the amount of sunlight incident on a surface" which supports the mainstream sublimation and debunks the electric comet delusion about EDM (which should be not dependent on sunlight but I am sure that there is a Thuinderboths fairy story to address this!).

 

[Reality Check]

This comment is also food for thought and tragic state of events for science too

It is food for thought about the ignorance of some comments on that blog, Haig, and a small comment on your continued state of ignorance about the policy for Rosetta data - the scientists who worked for about 20 years getting the data have 6 months first use of the data that they worked hard to collect . All of the teams have the option to release data for publicity or conferences.

The scientists working on the Rosetta data are in a sense "protecting the science". They are the experts in the design of the instruments because they designed them ! They are people best suited to analyze the data initially. The papers they will publish will then contain the details to make it easier for other scientists to do their own analysis and help prevent those scientists making errors.

 

[Reality Check]

Glad you agree that the 67P images look like ROCK ...

I think you would find that no one disagrees with the fact that every image of every comet nucleus looks like ROCK, Haig. What we disagree with is the delusion that comets made up of ices and dust must be ROCK because of those images.

As for the Thunderbolts electric comet delusion: The ignorance, delusions and lies in the Thunderbolts web site and videos

 

[Reality Check]

If that doesn't do it for you try looking at the pretty pictures of Electric Comets nucleus burnt by EDM

Haig, blindly parroting the Thunderbolts delusion about EMD and "supporting" it with a Google image search is not research - it is more like religious dogma .