The Electric Comet theory

[Reality Check]

Someone care to give a credible explanation for the stratification on these cliffs ?

A credible explanation would be that this stratification does not exist, Haig .
I see a corrugated, rough surface to the cliff sides. It may only be the surface. It may be actual stratification (see the definition you linked to).

Or a credible explanation for the deep neck (in shadow much more than the lobes) being the focus of activity for the JETS ?

THERMAL INTERIA, Haig. The bit of physics that says that a thin section of an object (a neck) is quicker to heat up than a thick section of an object (lobes).

 

[Sol88]

Ouch!

Latest Research Reveals a Bizarre and Vibrant Rosetta’s Comet

The Ma’at and Ash regions (in blue above) are buried in 3 to 15 feet of dust that once filled the comet’s coma and then slowly settled back to the surface. High resolution images show dune-like structures, ripples and rocks with wind tails. Winds on a comet? It’s thought that sublimating (vaporizing) CO and CO2 ice beneath the surface vents to the surface with a force strong enough to create fleeting gusty winds in the comet’s low gravity, lifting and moving dust across the landscape. Electrostatic levitation of dust charged by sunlight may also play a role.

And chunks of debris upto a metre orbiting the comet!!!

Ouch!!

COMETS are ELRCTRIC

 

[Reality Check]

Ouch!

Wow Great Science Ignored by Sol88!
Latest Research Reveals a Bizarre and Vibrant Rosetta’s Comet

Quote mining the article to hide that the electric comet delusion is debunked yet again by your citation:

Surprises include finding no firm evidence yet of ice on the comet’s nucleus. There’s no question water and other ices compose much of 67P’s 10 billion ton mass, but much of it’s buried under a thick layer of dust.

Despite its solid appearance, 67P is highly porous with a density similar to wood or cork and orbited by a cloud of approximately 100,000 “grains” of material larger than 2 inches (5 cm) across stranded there after the comet’s previous perihelion passage. Thousands of tiny comet-lets!

(my emphasis added)
What you quote is standard physics:

The Ma’at and Ash regions (in blue above) are buried in 3 to 15 feet of dust that once filled the comet’s coma and then slowly settled back to the surface. High resolution images show dune-like structures, ripples and rocks with wind tails. Winds on a comet? It’s thought that sublimating (vaporizing) CO and CO2 ice beneath the surface vents to the surface with a force strong enough to create fleeting gusty winds in the comet’s low gravity, lifting and moving dust across the landscape. Electrostatic levitation of dust charged by sunlight may also play a role.

This is nothing to so with an imaginary solar electric field or an equally imaginary charged comet nuclei or the fantasy that comets are rocks or the delusion that planets such as Venus and Earth got together and blasted comets from each other.
This is the solar wind interacting with dust that might play a role in addition to "winds" from sublimating CO and CO2 ice.

The ignorance of thinking that debris around a comet is anything to do with the electric comet delusion, Sol88 !
Comet nuclei have mass. Mass means gravity. Gravity means that there can be stable orbits around an comet nucleus. Let ice particles and dust be ejected from a comet surface by sublimating ices or possibly impacts. The Aten depression suggests that even large chucks of ice can be ejected. You will have ice particles, dust and ice chunks in orbit around the comet nucleus. These can collide and stick together to form bigger chucks.

Is it Haig or you who is always going on about wanting to see the sources for jets, Sol88?

Along one side of Imhotep dozens of circular structures or pits several hundred meters across many of which appear to be filled with several meters of dust. Scientists suspect they were once active sites of vaporizing ices and are waiting to see if they might come alive again as the comet warms as it approaches its August perihelion.

So we may see jets sourced from these pits.

 

[Reality Check]

A credible explanation would be that this stratification does not exist, Haig .
I see a corrugated, rough surface to the cliff sides. It may only be the surface. It may be actual stratification (see the definition you linked to).

Haig: Latest Research Reveals a Bizarre and Vibrant Rosetta’s Comet

The grandest of the consolidated surfaces – the fifth type of terrain – is Hathor, a towering 2,950-foot (900 meter) cliff that dominates the underside of the comet’s duck-like head. Its distinctive linear features, which run both up and down and across for much of its height, reveal brighter material that suggests we’re seeing the internal structure of the comet’s head. Tucked along an alcove on the cliff are additional bright white spots less than 30 feet (10-m) across that may be patches of sublimating ice.

has some pretty pictures for you

Several views of 67P’s giant cliff, Hathor. Erosion here in the form of linear grooves reveals the internal structure of the head. At lower right, Hathor meets the Hapi region. Credit: ESA/Rosetta/MPS for OSIRIS Team MPS/UPD/LAM/IAA/SSO/INTA/UPM/DASP/IDA

So it is not stratification - it is erosion.
My guess is that gas and dust from the neck of 67P flow along the cliff and erode it. I have also seen similar linear features from snow cornices where snow clumps have rolled down a cliff from the cornice. So maybe the linear grooves and "boulders" are related.

 

[Cygnus_X1]

Ouch!

Latest Research Reveals a Bizarre and Vibrant Rosetta’s Comet



And chunks of debris upto a metre orbiting the comet!!!

Ouch!!

COMETS are ELRCTRIC

But the visible emission of the comet tail, etc. are not a discharge phenomenon.

Electrostatic levitation of dust has been a process studied for years by mainstream science. Just a sampling of my collection:

1962: Photoelectric screening of bodies in interplanetary space
1962: Electrostatic Dust Transport on the Lunar Surface
1967: Electrostatic Potential of a Cosmic Dust Particle
1981: On the electrostatic charging of the cometary nucleus
1981: Dust emission from comets at large heliocentric distances. I - The case of comet Bowell /1980b/
1986: On the brightness variations of Comet Halley at large heliocentric distances

and loads of others I've collected.

All EU 'theorists' have done is taken the legitimate work of others and tried to 'spin' it into support for their nonsense.

 

[tusenfem]

Listening to Philip Glass's Akhnaten

... The Aten depression suggests that even large chucks of ice can be ejected. ...

And his majesty said unto them, "Ye behold the City of the Horizon of the Aten, which the Aten has desired me to make for him as a monument in the great name of my majesty forever. For it was the Aten, my Father, that brought me to this City of the Horizon. There was not a noble who directed me to it; there was not any man in the whole land who led me to it, saying, 'It is fitting for his majesty that he make a City of the Horizon of Aten in this place.' Nay, but it was the Aten, my Father, that directed me to make it for him. Behold the Pharaoh found that this site belonged not to a god, nor to a goddess, it belonged not to a prince nor to a princess. There was no right for any man to act as owner of it.

"I will make the City of the Horizon of the Aten for the Aten, my Father, in this place. I will not make the city south of it, north of it, west of it or east of it. I will not pass beyond the southern boundary stone southward, neither will I pass beyond the northern boundary stone northward to make for him a City of the Horizon there; neither will I make for him a city on the western side. Nay, but I will make the City of the Horizon for the Aten, my Father, upon the east side, the place for which he did enclose for his own self with cliffs, and made a plain in the midst of it that I might sacrifice to him thereon: this is it.

"Neither shall the Queen say unto me, `Behold there is a goodly place for the City of the Horizon in another place', and I harken unto her. Neither shall any noble nor any man in the whole land say unto me, `Behold there is a goodly place for the City of the Horizon in another place', and I harken unto them. Whether it be downstream or southward or westward or eastward, I will not say, `I will abandon this City of the Horizon.' "

 

[tusenfem]

as a futher aside and thread hijack, philip glass decided to compose akhnate after he had read velikovsky's book "oedipus and echnaton" (don't mind the misspellings) on of two velikovsky books i happen to have

 

[Reality Check]

Another description of the Science papers: At last! A slew of OSIRIS images shows fascinating landscapes on Rosetta's comet
Emily Lakdawalla notes that

Some of the most impressive features on the comet are circular, flat-floored, steep-walled depressions, like this one in the Seth region. They bear similarities to features comet missions have seen before, on Wild 2 and Tempel 1. It's clear from the OSIRIS images that at least some of these host comet jets, which become visible when you crank up the contrast in the photo:

The OSIRIS Team are amore conservative and call them "jet-like features".
We are still getting basically PR images but

Untold treasures await among the vast archive of image data being gathered by Rosetta. Mark your calendars -- the first pile of data should be released to the public on May 19, 2015, including images gathered up to November 19, 2014.

 

[LSSBB]

Another description of the Science papers: At last! A slew of OSIRIS images shows fascinating landscapes on Rosetta's comet
Emily Lakdawalla notes that

The OSIRIS Team are amore conservative and call them "jet-like features".
We are still getting basically PR images but

I like this part:

The fact that I found most striking in here was the 70-80% porosity. I had a hard time wrapping my mind about what kind of interior structure could create such a huge amount of void space, but I looked up a paper on snow physics and found that this this is actually quite a bit less porous than fresh snow, more in the neighborhood of wind-packed snow or melt-freeze crusts atop snowbanks. Of course, the comet isn't just made of water ice; it has other ices of varying densities, and also organic and silicate materials, too. But I'm somewhat relieved by the fact that, the pososity of an icy world with nearly zero gravity is in family with snow.

 

[tusenfem]

There is another paper in Nature by Rita Schulz (former Rosetta Mission Scientist) Comet 67P/Churyumov-Gerasimenko sheds dust
coat accumulated over the past four years

 

[BazBear]

I learn so much from reading about crackpot science - or at least from the rebuttals to such nonsense. I can't wait to see P67 really start "cookin" as it approaches perihelion.

Along with the New Horizons fly-by of Pluto, it should be an exciting summer (or winter for those in the southern hemisphere) for both scientists and space enthusiasts.

 

[JeanTate]

This thread's gone rather quiet lately, even though 67P is hotting up; I wonder why?

[snip]

The [B]Electric Comet[/B] is a Charged Body and That leads to errors in calculated density as measured !

[snip]

Something about that that's always puzzled me ... why is it that the measured density seems to cluster around 0.4 (water=1)? I mean, if the charge on the body (comet nucleus) is messing with density measurements, how come the density doesn't sometimes come in way above that of rock (or ices)? How come it's always below?

Also, in the ech, there's an extraordinary amount of discharging going on (all that EDM which is what we see as jets), so the charge must be changing, right? either increasing or decreasing (depending on which direction the 'discharge' is going in), right?

If so, how come the measured density of comets (67P in particular) doesn't change correspondingly?

Oh, and about comets being rock with compositions reflecting the surfaces of the planets from which they were ripped ... didn't I read that the surface of 67P is remarkable monotone, 99+% the same color (multi-band color, much more sensitive etc than what human eyes can register)? Rather inconsistent with it being 'surface rock from a rocky planet', right?

 

[JeanTate]

[snip]

Some pretty picture from the OSIRIS camera would also be quite nice.

Some have now been published; what did you think of them?

I was particularly impressed with how hard to see the jets are ... there's one of a pit (EDM-created crater, in the ech if I'm not mistaken), and with suitable image processing you can see a pair of jets coming from inside it.

If the jets are EDM, they're like nothing ever seen here on Earth, in any lab or workshop, right? I mean, in EDM, the discharges are really, really bright, especially if they are energetic enough to dig holes several metres across in hard rock (which, per the ech, is what the surface of 67P is). Doubly especially if the jets - which are the EDM discharges, right - are many kilometres long.

Explanation (other than 'the ech is dead')?

 

[Sol88]

This thread's gone rather quiet lately, even though 67P is hotting up; I wonder why?


Something about that that's always puzzled me ... why is it that the measured density seems to cluster around 0.4 (water=1)? I mean, if the charge on the body (comet nucleus) is messing with density measurements, how come the density doesn't sometimes come in way above that of rock (or ices)? How come it's always below?

Also, in the ech, there's an extraordinary amount of discharging going on (all that EDM which is what we see as jets), so the charge must be changing, right? either increasing or decreasing (depending on which direction the 'discharge' is going in), right?

If so, how come the measured density of comets (67P in particular) doesn't change correspondingly?

Oh, and about comets being rock with compositions reflecting the surfaces of the planets from which they were ripped ... didn't I read that the surface of 67P is remarkable monotone, 99+% the same color (multi-band color, much more sensitive etc than what human eyes can register)? Rather inconsistent with it being 'surface rock from a rocky planet', right?

Something about that that's always puzzled me ...is

The dust particles were found to be rich in sodium, sharing the characteristics of ‘interplanetary dust particles’. These are found in meteor streams originating from comets, including the annual Perseids from Comet 109P/Swift–Tuttle and the Leonids from 55P/Tempel–Tuttle.
“We found that the dust particles released first when the comet started to become active again are ‘fluffy’. They don’t contain ice, but they do contain a lot of sodium. We have found the parent material of interplanetary dust particles,” says lead author Rita Schulz of ESA’s Scientific Support Office.
The scientists believe that the grains detected were stranded on the comet’s surface after its last perihelion passage, when the flow of gas away from the surface had subsided and was no longer sufficient to lift dust grains from the surface.

LINK

so light fluffy dust that contains no water ice....

then...

“This clearly doesn't mean that the comet is not rich in water, but only that there is no water ice in the outermost shell, just over one millimetre thick,” explains Fabrizio Capaccioni, VIRTIS Principal Investigator from INAF-IAPS in Rome, Italy. “The reason for this is rooted in the recent history of the comet's evolution, since repeated passes in the vicinity of the Sun cause surface ice to sublimate.”

“The formation of such compounds requires the presence of ices of volatile molecules such as methanol, methane or carbon monoxide, which only freeze at very low temperatures,” explains Capaccioni. “Therefore, these compounds must have formed at large distances from the Sun, during the early stages of the build up of the Solar System. This suggests that we are facing a comet that locks up, in its interior, traces of primordial chemical compounds that date back to the formation of our Solar System, or possibly to an even earlier epoch.”

lINK

and...

By assuming an overall composition dominated by water ice and dust with a density of 1500–2000 kg/m3, the Rosetta scientists show that the comet has a very high porosity of 70–80%, with the interior structure likely comprising weakly bonded ice-dust clumps with small void spaces between them.

and finally

“If we compare the data with laboratory measurements, we think that the probe encountered a hard surface with strength comparable to that of solid ice,” says Tilman Spohn, principal investigator for MUPUS.
Looking at the results of the thermal mapper and the probe together, the team have made the preliminary assessment that the upper layers of the comet’s surface consist of dust of 10–20 cm thickness, overlaying mechanically strong ice or ice and dust mixtures.

LINK

So...what are they trying to tell us??

light fluffy comets with cliffs and cracks and boulders!!!


VERY interested in seeing how they reconcile this discordant data.

and I spose, just for extra points, how do they reconcile the

The comet samples collected by Stardust contain abundant crystalline minerals and in most cases it is clear that they did not form by the predicted mild heating of interstellar dust. Many are too large, and have complex mineralogical and chemical compositions that could not have formed by this process. Instead of the mild heating that astronomers envisioned the comet samples were heated during their formation to severe temperatures, temperatures high enough to melt or vaporize them. The temperatures above 1300 �C and the samples were white hot. This is quite remarkable because the some of the ice components of comets appear to have formed only 30 degrees above absolute zero. The comet is very odd mix of materials that formed at the highest and lowest temperatures that existed in the early solar system

LINK


So I'm puzzled as well.
http://stardust.jpl.nasa.gov/news/news113.html

 

[Sol88]

Some have now been published; what did you think of them?

I was particularly impressed with how hard to see the jets are ... there's one of a pit (EDM-created crater, in the ech if I'm not mistaken), and with suitable image processing you can see a pair of jets coming from inside it.

If the jets are EDM, they're like nothing ever seen here on Earth, in any lab or workshop, right? I mean, in EDM, the discharges are really, really bright, especially if they are energetic enough to dig holes several metres across in hard rock (which, per the ech, is what the surface of 67P is). Doubly especially if the jets - which are the EDM discharges, right - are many kilometres long.

Explanation (other than 'the ech is dead')?

Yeah great pic of the jets emanating from the pit! Now for a high res OSIRIS picture of the out-gassing emanating from flat areas.

Some sources of discrete jets of activity have also been identified. While a significant proportion of activity emanates from the smooth neck region, jets have also been spotted rising from pits.

link

Noted though is the exceptionally bright "pit" rim. Image here

 

[LSSBB]

so light fluffy dust that contains no water ice....


So...what are they trying to tell us??

light fluffy comets with cliffs and cracks and boulders!!!


VERY interested in seeing how they reconcile this discordant data.

and I spose, just for extra points, how do they reconcile the

How dense is a boulder?

For extra points, how thick is the dust layer?

For the gold star, how does ECH fit the observations? Right now, ECH appears to be a failure.

 

[rwguinn]

Yeah great pic of the jets emanating from the pit! Now for a high res OSIRIS picture of the out-gassing emanating from flat areas.

link

Noted though is the exceptionally bright "pit" rim. Image here

Looks like ICE to me. I spent 20 years in Colorado. I know what ice looks like, and that looks like ice.

 

[Cygnus_X1]

Something about that that's always puzzled me ...is LINK
so light fluffy dust that contains no water ice....
then...

lINK
and...
and finally
LINK

So...what are they trying to tell us??

light fluffy comets with cliffs and cracks and boulders!!!

It's funny that Electric Universe cranks, who CLAIM to be 'interdisciplinary', have some rather 15th century attitudes about mechanics, fluids, etc, in addition to their 19th century comprehension of electromagnetism.

If I do an online search for 'images glacier calving', I find loads of images showing ice and snow that formed steep cliffs, and cracks, and even boulder-shaped objects floating in the water.

VERY interested in seeing how they reconcile this discordant data.

and I spose, just for extra points, how do they reconcile the LINK

Yeah great pic of the jets emanating from the pit! Now for a high res OSIRIS picture of the out-gassing emanating from flat areas.

link

Noted though is the exceptionally bright "pit" rim. Image here

If you actually observe the shadows, it's clear that rim is bright because it is in direct sunlight.

Perhaps you can invoke the shadow 'inconsistencies' similar to those made popular by the moon landing deniers?

Yet none of the 'problems' are fatal for the standard comet model. Most will probably be solved with better understanding of how a short-period comet evolves in structure and composition with repeated cycles of heating and cooling.

BTW, it seems the creationists are also using the 'looks like rock' claim, 'Dinosaur Eggs' on Comet 67P

So I guess this begs the question, since some creationists also claim that what it looks like is evidence for THEIR model, how do you decide between this YEC model and ECH?

- Do we have any numerical values from the ECH model that we can compare to the YEC 'hydroplate' model? Oh, wait, I haven't found any numerical predictions from the YECs either.

- Perhaps EU can claim ECH is superior because it isn't a 'religiously motivated' model? That's funny for a theory pushed by David Talbott who labels himself as a 'comparative mythologist' (Coast to Coast AM). It may have been someone on this forum who described mythology as 'a religion with no living adherents' which is pretty insightful, and suggests EU is indistinguishable from another religion.

- And don't cry about 'dark matter' being a 'religion'. Mainstream cosmologists can do more accurate cosmological simulations with the (so far) undetected 'dark matter' (see Wikipedia: Illustris Project) than anyone has obtained with the Peratt model (which only did spiral galaxies and did not present anything about giant elliptical galaxies or dwarfs).

Just in case you've lost track, here's just some reminders of the short-comings of ECH and mis-representations of the mainstream model by EU supporters.

Post 2563: X-rays from comets have been a prediction since at least the 1970s

Post 2820: More references on mainstream comet models answers questions that ECH can't answer

Post 3221: Positive ions in comet tails

Post 3287: More problems with 'Electric Comets'

Post 3323: Problems with Electric Sun interpretation of sunspots

Post 3406roblems with Electric Sun models needed for Electric Comets, the failure of SAFIRE

Post 3407: History of electric comets in mainstream science and charged particle motion in comet tail

Post 3442: Solar electric fields understood by mainstream science

Post 3797: Questions ECH needs to answer

Post 3804: Data sources used by other researchers for planning the Rosetta mission.

Post 3828: Predictions from ECH for various Rosetta instruments

Post 3925: Short list of long history of study of electric forces in space by mainstream astronomy

I'm sure others on this thread will have additional lists of ECH gross failures. EU 'theorists' have yet provide us estimates for the helio & comet radiation environment needed to protect the spacecraft while the mainstream model can.

So it seems we're still waiting from some REAL results from ECH supporters

 

[Sol88]

Looks like another nail for the whipplelites!

0.4g/cm3 density and no voids, according to CONCERT data.

 

[thedopefishlives]

Looks like another nail for the whipplelites!

0.4g/cm3 density and no voids, according to CONCERT data.

Perhaps I missed the significance of the 0.4 g/cm^3 in my short absence, but as far as I'm aware, this is far less dense than rock and less dense even than water, which would rather strengthen the case for the "dirty snowball" and not an electrically charged rock.