View Single Post
Old 1st April 2020, 03:29 AM   #1773
Reality Check
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: New Zealand
Posts: 28,430
Exclamation Sol88 confirms his insanity that A'Hearn stated that comets are actual rocks

Missed the deadline for editing a post and this needs to be a separate post to show what insanity Sol88 is capable of.
Sol88 confirms his insanity that A'Hearn stated that comets are actual rocks by quoting A'Hearn stating that Tempel 1 had "snowbank" outer layers. Note that Sol88's deranged dogma is that even the surface of comets is rock.
Composition of a Comet Poses a Puzzle for Scientists Sept. 7, 2005 (2 months after Deep Impact)
Observations of the Deep Impact collision confirmed that the comet is mostly empty space. The outer layers of Tempel 1 are "unbelievably fragile, less strong than a snow bank," said Michael A'Hearn, the mission's principal investigator, during a telephone news conference yesterday.
Michael A'Hearn states that outer layers of comet Tempel 1 are "a snow bank", not rock !
We already knew that Sol88 was spewing out insane insults of the deceased Michael Francis A'Hearn and all astronomers by Sol88 linking them with Sol88's demented dogma, etc. and now Sol88 confirms his insanity !
Sol88 is too cowardly to link to the paper and expose his delusions and insults:
Comets: looking ahead
We outline the key questions about comets that must be answered in order to understand cometary formation in the context of the protoplanetary disc and the role of comets in the formation and evolution of the solar system. We then discuss the new understanding of comets from Rosetta and from other recent advances, including work presented by others at the discussion meeting. Finally, we suggest some key directions for future projects to better address the above questions.
c) What are comets made of?

At the simplest level, a very basic question is whether comets are mostly ice or mostly rock/dirt/refractory material. Whipple’s [2] model of the dirty snowball, the first quantitative model, envisioned cometary nuclei as mostly ice, although our understanding has been evolving more toward mostly rock, particularly for 67P/C-G for which refractory/volatile ratios as high as 6 have been cited [3,4]. Nevertheless, there is still considerable uncertainty about even this basic parameter, not least of which is that most measurements are subject to selection effects in removing refractories from the nucleus to the coma, where they are observed as dust.

With improvements in remote sensing over the last decade and particularly the wealth of measurements from Rosetta, we are making large strides in answering the question of which volatiles (ices) are near the surface of cometary nuclei, and the Deep Impact experiment implies that the near-surface volatiles are representative of the deeper interior [5,6]. The indications are that there is a large dispersion in relative abundances with only very limited correlations between relative abundances and any other parameters. On the other hand, we know very little about the abundance of the many possible refractory species. As noted above, there were great advances from the Stardust mission, particularly the clear demonstration that cometary silicate grains had been transported from near the Sun to the region of cometary formation, but the selection effects in collecting the returned samples make it almost impossible to say much quantitatively about the bulk abundances of refractories [7].
It takes 1 brain cell to understand that "comets" is more than 1 comet! In astronomy "refractory" means non-volatile as opposed to volatile (not Sol88's insanity of actual rock).

Last edited by Reality Check; 1st April 2020 at 03:38 AM.
Reality Check is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top