The Electric Comet theory

[Reality Check]

I see that you are just parroting your usual stuff and ignoring the actual question.
Thank you for confirming Dancing David's prediction of your behavior.

Do we know the net charge on any of these asteroids? or indeed comets? The region of "space weather" they are in? The solar "wind" speed and density at their location?

Ummm... no.

We know that asteroids and comets are in the solar wind. We know that asteroids and comets are in the solar magnetic field. Astronomers know a lot about both. That includes the solar wind speed and density (measured for near the sun, modeled for further out).
The "net charge" of asteroids or comets has not been measured AFAIK. It is probably zero since the solar wind is neutral. But maybe you can cite the published papers that have a mechanism to charge up asteroids to the point that they act like comets?

This means that the EC idea remains an idea with so many fundamental problems that it is obviously non-science.

Would we be able to visually see low level discharge on an asteroid?

We would certainly have seen them on Tempel 1 when Deep Impact observed the nucleus. But we did not.
If we had then you have the problem of showing that "low level discharge" can convert rock into water.


And there is more than the visible in the electromagnetic spectrum:

• Electric Comets III: No EU X-rays (actually no EU X-ray bursts).

Such as that that occurs on Mercury?

Mercury is not a comet or an asteroid.

I'm sorry Davidlpf but I don't know, but I'm sure we will find more (MBC's) the longer we look, as well as more ice on rocky bodies until the difference between icy asteroids and comets is very hard to tell apart!

This is just about the first thing in this thread that you have said that is sensible.
We probably will find more MBC.
We have never found ice on rocky bodies. We may find more signatures of water on rocky bodies.


Icy asteroids and comets will always be easy to tell apart.

• Asteroids have measured densities of about 3 g/cc (typical of rocks).
• Icy asteroids would have a minimum density of 1 g/cc (all ice) and will have densities greater than that (rocky core + ice or rubble pile + ice).
• Comets have measured densities of about 0.6 g/cc (typical of a snow ball).

 

[Sol88]

What orbital speed are they doing RC?

Are these asteroids as fast as comets?

 

[Sol88]

The "net charge" of asteroids or comets has not been measured AFAIK. It is probably zero since the solar wind is neutral. But maybe you can cite the published papers that have a mechanism to charge up asteroids to the point that they act like comets?

Been there done that, your Alzheimer's must be acting up again RC

 

[Dancing David]

Do we know the net charge on any of these asteroids? or indeed comets? The region of "space weather" they are in? The solar "wind" speed and density at their location?

Your theory, your data.

Ummm... no.

So no model and no data , okay.

Would we be able to visually see low level discharge on an asteroid? Such as that that occurs on Mercury?

Where is the coma on Mercury?

I'm sorry Davidlpf but I don't know, but I'm sure we will find more (MBC's) the longer we look, as well as more ice on rocky bodies until the difference between icy asteroids and comets is very hard to tell apart!

So still no data, you have four 'asteroids' that act like 'comets'.

 

[Dancing David]

Been there done that, your Alzheimer's must be acting up again RC

Can't provide data, so you resort to ad homs.

 

[Sol88]

The "net charge" of asteroids or comets has not been measured AFAIK. It is probably zero since the solar wind is neutral. But maybe you can cite the published papers that have a mechanism to charge up asteroids to the point that they act like comets?

Been there done that, your Alzheimer's must be acting up again RC

Try these again

http://www.lpi.usra.edu/meetings/lpsc2009/pdf/1357.pdf

or

http://www.agu.org/pubs/crossref/2009/2009JA014113.shtml

Just a quote mine. but hey I'm Sol88!!

If surface electric fields can overcome surface cohesion
and Van der Waals forces, they could lift charged dust
grains form the surface and transport them vertically
and/or laterally.

You know, like on a comet!

 

[Dancing David]

What orbital speed are they doing RC?

Are these asteroids as fast as comets?

Your theory, you tell us why your theory fails, there are asteroids with large eccentricities that should show the alleged coma and other 'cometary' features of your theory, yet they don't.

maybe because your theory is wrong.

 

[Sol88]

Sorry DD, you were saying?

 

[Sol88]

Your theory, you tell us why your theory fails, there are asteroids with large eccentricities that should show the alleged coma and other 'cometary' features of your theory, yet they don't.

maybe because your theory is wrong.

Where can I find data on their orbital speeds? Comets and Asteroids?

 

[Sol88]

Your theory, your data.

So no model and no data , okay.

Where is the coma on Mercury?


So still no data, you have four 'asteroids' that act like 'comets'.

The coma on Mercury is called the exosphere!

And my quess is the asteroids that show cometary activity for only part of the orbit, is much the same as our moons surface charging!

they passed thru an area of higher plasma density and speed!

Résumé / Abstract
[1] We analyzed a series of solar energetic particle events in late April and early May of 1998, during which lunar surface potentials reached values as large as ∼-4.5 kV (the largest recorded by Lunar Prospector). The two largest surface charging events during this time period correspond to energetic particle injections, when the electron flux between 50 keV and 5 MeV exceeded the proton flux over the same energy range. We searched the entire Lunar Prospector data set for other large negative surface charging events, and found that they occur almost exclusively during magnetotail crossings (when the Moon encounters the plasmasheet) and solar energetic particle events. Lunar surface charging (and its effect on the lunar dust environment) during inherently unpredictable space weather events represents a significant hazard for exploration.

LINK



My bold

 

[Dancing David]

So no coma on Mercury, okay.

 

[Reality Check]

Been there done that, your Alzheimer's must be acting up again RC

Try these again

http://www.lpi.usra.edu/meetings/lpsc2009/pdf/1357.pdf

or

http://www.agu.org/pubs/crossref/2009/2009JA014113.shtml

Just a quote mine. but hey I'm Sol88!!

You know, like on a comet!

In this case it is your reading comprehension rather than memore or basic arithemetic scills that have abandondonde you Sol88

The "net charge" of asteroids or comets has not been measured AFAIK. It is probably zero since the solar wind is neutral. But maybe you can cite the published papers that have a mechanism to charge up asteroids to the point that they act like comets?

Comets have coma and tails that are mostly water.
Try again.
(actually if you have forgotten that basic fact then maybe your Alzheimer's is acting up yet again !)

P.S. solrey is the quote miner not you.

 

[Reality Check]

Where can I find data on their orbital speeds? Comets and Asteroids?

Someone needs to learn how to remember what they read. As has been stated many times in the last 2 months:

Sol88 in particular has known that many asteroids should be comets according to the EC idea. Sol88 has known this for amost 2 months.
The JPL Small-Body Database Browser has a search engine. If you use the eccentricity of the main-belt comets (to give EC the best chance of being right) then there are 173,583 cataloged asteroids with an eccentricity > 0.17. There are 459,893 asteroids with eccentricities greater than the minimum observed eccentricity of comets (0.0279).

 

[Sol88]

So no coma on Mercury, okay.

How did 19P/Holmes hold onto it's atmosphere/Coma? How strong was the gravity on this comet?

coma/atmosphere/exosphere the're all the same.

Inner planets
Atmosphere of Mercury

Due to its small size (and thus its small gravity), Mercury has no substantial atmosphere. Its extremely thin atmosphere mostly consists of a small amount of helium and traces of sodium, potassium, and oxygen. These gases derive from the solar wind, radioactive decay, meteor impacts, and breakdown of Mercury's crust.[3][4] Mercury's atmosphere is not stable and is constantly being refreshed because of its atoms escaping into space as a result of the planet's heat.

LINK

On the Moon the photoelectric effect and electrons in the solar wind charges fine layers of moon dust on the surface forming an atmosphere of dust floating in "fountains" over the surface of the moon.

LINK

A comet coma is like a comet's atmosphere. It is made up of the heated gases and dust that makes up the comet's nucleus.

LINK

 

[Sol88]

In this case it is your reading comprehension rather than memore or basic arithemetic scills that have abandondonde you Sol88

Comets have coma and tails that are mostly water.
Try again.
(actually if you have forgotten that basic fact then maybe your Alzheimer's is acting up yet again !)

P.S. solrey is the quote miner not you.

After the dust has been electrically removed from the nucleus and is exposed to a greater extent to the solar wind, the standard OH making process would be much more efficient at "making" water because of the increased surface area!

you know like thay JUST found on the moon!!

The Sub keV Atom reflecting Analyzer (SARA) corroborates that electrically charged particles from the Sun interact with the oxygen present in some dust grains on the lunar surface to produce water. But the results bring out a new mystery of why some protons get reflected and not absorbed.

Scientists likened the Moon's surface to a big sponge that absorbs the electrically charged particles. The lunar surface is a loose collection of irregular dust grains, or regolith, and the incoming charged particles should be trapped in the spaces between the grains and absorbed. When this happens to protons they are expected to interact with the oxygen in the lunar regolith to produce hydroxyl and water.

So instead on the Moon's surface, you have dust in the comets coma/atmosphere and tail exposed to the same mechanism as on the moon/mercury and asteroids!!!

“We didn’t expect to see this at all,” says Stas Barabash, Swedish Institute of Space Physics, who is the European Principal Investigator for SARA.

So you would expect to see OH production in the coma and tail of a comet, as observed! http://www.iop.org/EJ/article/1538-3881/131/2/1130/205024.web.pdf?request-id=c0d34b41-2d06-4e1a-a9bc-0bc1b21cac36

 

[Davidlpf]

After the dust has been electrically removed from the nucleus and is exposed to a greater extent to the solar wind, the standard OH making process would be much more efficient at "making" water because of the increased surface area!


Pure conjuncture how do you know the dust is electrically removed and is not released due to heating. Any proof or more EU magic hand waving.

A comet coma is like a comet's atmosphere. It is made up of the heated gases and dust that makes up the comet's nucleus.

Even things you quote disagree with you it states the gases are heated not excited by electric charges.

By the way you still have not answered my question.

 

[Reality Check]

After the dust has been electrically removed from the nucleus and is exposed to a greater extent to the solar wind, the standard OH making process would be much more efficient at "making" water because of the increased surface area!

you know like thay JUST found on the moon!!

Learn to undestand some science Soll88!!
You are talking about a process that turns about ~0.001% of water into the Moon dust (0.01% at most).

So instead on the Moon's surface, you have dust in the comets coma/atmosphere and tail exposed to the same mechanism as on the moon/mercury and asteroids!!!

And once more: ~0.01% (water in the Moon surface) is not ~20% (water in comet surface).
But then your inability to understand this is expected since you also cannot comprehend that ~0.6 g/cc (comet density) is not the same as 3 g/cc (asteroid density).

So you would expect to see OH production in the coma and tail of a comet, as observed! http://www.iop.org/EJ/article/1538-3881/131/2/1130/205024.web.pdf?request-id=c0d34b41-2d06-4e1a-a9bc-0bc1b21cac36

This paper is about the production rates from the nucleus of Comet Tempel 1 as measured in the coma (not the tail). The OH they mention is the OH that is produced from photo-disassociation of water. This is a method that is in common usage for cometary observations. It has been observed many times before.

 

[Reality Check]

Water, water everywhere (except in the EC idea)

(thanks Sol88 for reminding me that the Deep Impact results supply more than 1 nail in the EC coffin!)
(edited to empahsis that this is about EDM not comet composition before adding the post to the growing collection of EC idea failures)

EC universe: Comets are rocky bodies, comparable to asteroids and probably created in the same event as asteroids (according to Thunderbolts). Comet jets, coma and tails are created from material (e.g. water) that that is created from rock by electrical discharge machining. Like everything in the EC idea there are no numbers and so no prediction of the composition of the nucleus. We could say that means that the EC idea predicts no water (0%) but there should be some blowback from the physically impossible (on comets) EDM process.
Asteroids in general have very low amounts of water. So let's just throw in 1% water as an extremely generous guess - IMHO it should be something like 0.01%. Sol88 or solrey should provide a better number if they have it.

Real universe: Comets are bodies with a mixture of rock and ices of various compounds, e.g. CO and water. They are have been described as "dirty snowballs". The volatile material (ices) is heated by the Sun and sublimates to form jets, the coma and the tail.

So let up look at the results of the Deep Impact mission

The impact ejected material from the nucleus that was composed of 20-50% of water and 80-50% dust.

Thus before the impact a random spot on the nucleus surface was covered with material that contained at least 20% water to a depth of about 30 meters. This is is many times greater than what the EC idea predicts.

How can the EC idea produce all this water?
My guess based on the inane logic that we see from EC proponents is that they will say the the EDM magically increases by orders of magnitude for some unspecified reason after the impact and then goes back to normal after a few days. They will ignore the fact that EDM produces narrow band X-ray radiation (in bursts) even normally. The gigantic increase in radiation would be easily seen in the X-ray observations of the impact.

N.B.
There is a large asteroid with a confirmed signature of water on its surface (no abundance data yet): 24 Themis.
One third of the mass of the asteroid belt is contained in the dwarf planet Ceres whose shape indicates a rocky core and icy mantle.

 

[Dancing David]

How did 19P/Holmes hold onto it's atmosphere/Coma? How strong was the gravity on this comet?

coma/atmosphere/exosphere the're all the same.

LINK

LINK

LINK

Hmmm, not really, I have looked at comets and I have looked at Mercury.

If Mercury had a coma comparable to a comet, it would be very large and very visible.

 

[Belz...]

Ugh, another electric thread ? What is it with these folks, anyway ? Why does everything need to be electric ? What's next ? Electric trees ?