Forum Index Register Members List Events Mark Forums Read Help

 International Skeptics Forum The Electric Comet theory

 Notices Sadly I have to announce that Locknar is leaving the moderating team. He's contributed massively to keeping this place going over the years. Thanks for all your hard work especially dealing with the new registrations (yeah really thanks for leaving me with that!)

 Welcome to the International Skeptics Forum, where we discuss skepticism, critical thinking, the paranormal and science in a friendly but lively way. You are currently viewing the forum as a guest, which means you are missing out on discussing matters that are of interest to you. Please consider registering so you can gain full use of the forum features and interact with other Members. Registration is simple, fast and free! Click here to register today.
 15th December 2014, 08:27 AM #2881 tusenfem Master Poster     Join Date: May 2008 Posts: 2,248 Originally Posted by paladin17 T My sources (like the mentioned data from ACE) tell that there is an electric current. Then I am sure you can show us the data of this current and your sources. __________________ 20 minutes into the future This message is bra-bra-brought to you by z-z-z-zik zak And-And-And I'm going to be back with you - on Network 23 after these real-real-real-really exciting messages (Max Headroom) follow me on twitter: @tusenfem, or follow Rosetta Plasma Consortium: @Rosetta_RPC
 15th December 2014, 08:46 AM #2882 Belz... Fiend God     Join Date: Oct 2005 Location: In the details Posts: 72,392 Originally Posted by Haig It seems I've wasted my time with you Belz but it was fun ... does that make me a bad person Yes it does. You haven't put any effort or time into answering my question, clearly because you don't understand any of the ideas you claim to espouse. __________________ Master of the Shining Darkness
 15th December 2014, 09:18 AM #2883 phunk Illuminator     Join Date: Aug 2007 Posts: 3,700 Originally Posted by paladin17 Actual measurements suggest otherwise. Which ones?
 15th December 2014, 10:07 AM #2884 Haig Graduate Poster     Join Date: Feb 2010 Posts: 1,635 Originally Posted by Belz... Yes it does. You haven't put any effort or time into answering my question, clearly because you don't understand any of the ideas you claim to espouse. That's harsh. I put in what time I have spare. This thread about Electric Comets not about me. Just look at the facts and evidence and make your own mind up. It's your choice but it is fun to watch the mainstream coming around to the Electromagnetic way ☺
 15th December 2014, 10:13 AM #2885 Belz... Fiend God     Join Date: Oct 2005 Location: In the details Posts: 72,392 Originally Posted by Haig That's harsh. Reality is harsh. Quote: Just look at the facts and evidence and make your own mind up. What facts ? You have avoided answering my question with them. __________________ Master of the Shining Darkness
 15th December 2014, 10:55 AM #2886 Haig Graduate Poster     Join Date: Feb 2010 Posts: 1,635 Originally Posted by Belz... Reality is harsh. So it is. Are you any relation to R C ?😊 Quote: What facts ? You have avoided answering my question with them. Belz if you don't notice the facts and evidence in the links and videos I've posted ... then we're done here. My putting them in my own words won't change your blindness to that. Even if I could be bothered to waste more time on you. Bye Bye
 15th December 2014, 11:05 AM #2887 Belz... Fiend God     Join Date: Oct 2005 Location: In the details Posts: 72,392 Originally Posted by Haig Belz if you don't notice the facts and evidence in the links and videos I've posted ... then we're done here. At the very least POINT OUT what your links say about EC. You just dump texts, none of which even discuss EC except to say that's going to be proven right at some point, and expect me to accept that as some sort of proof at rocky comets are in any related to the idea ? And you have the gall to pretend that the fault is mine ? You are a hack. __________________ Master of the Shining Darkness
 15th December 2014, 11:30 AM #2888 paladin17 Student   Join Date: Dec 2014 Posts: 47 Originally Posted by tusenfem Then I am sure you can show us the data of this current and your sources. Of course. Here they are: http://www.srl.caltech.edu/ACE/ASC/D..._plot_archive/. Originally Posted by phunk Which ones? See above. If you have some additional source of data, it would be most welcome.
 15th December 2014, 01:12 PM #2889 Reality Check Penultimate Amazing   Join Date: Mar 2008 Location: New Zealand Posts: 21,789 Originally Posted by Haig In my own words ??? ... In your own words what do we have, Haig? A repeated obsession with the phrase "rock comet" used for asteroids that have dust tails close to the Sun and are not comets! The repeated inability to tell the fantasies of the Thunderbolts forum commenters from reality. Remember these are people so ignorant that they cannot tell the difference between 0.6 g/cc and 3.0 g/cc ! The fantasy that rock comets are actual comets. Ignorance about the electric comet idea - it is not dust being blown off rocks because of heating - that word electric should be a clue, Haig ! Four years and counting of ignorance about Electric comets still do not exist ! The inability to understand that citing a crank who thinks that electric discharges created the Grand Canyon and lied to the Thunderbolts readers reflects badly on your ability to tell the difference between delusions and reality. __________________ NASA Finds Direct Proof of Dark Matter (another observation) (and Abell 520) Electric comets still do not exist!
 15th December 2014, 01:17 PM #2890 Belz... Fiend God     Join Date: Oct 2005 Location: In the details Posts: 72,392 Originally Posted by Reality Check Ignorance about the electric comet idea - it is not dust being blown off rocks because of heating - that word electric should be a clue, Haig ! That's why I asked him to explain what the hell those comets have to do with the electric universe nonsense. He replies with links about how heat blows off part of the comets, as if that's electric, somehow. __________________ Master of the Shining Darkness
 15th December 2014, 01:23 PM #2891 Reality Check Penultimate Amazing   Join Date: Mar 2008 Location: New Zealand Posts: 21,789 Haig: List of outstanding questions Originally Posted by Haig Another video of fantasies, delusions and lies from the Thunderbolts authors, Haig? __________________ NASA Finds Direct Proof of Dark Matter (another observation) (and Abell 520) Electric comets still do not exist!
 15th December 2014, 01:31 PM #2892 Reality Check Penultimate Amazing   Join Date: Mar 2008 Location: New Zealand Posts: 21,789 Originally Posted by Belz... That's why I asked him to explain what the hell those comets have to do with the electric universe nonsense. He replies with links about how heat blows off part of the comets, as if that's electric, somehow. There is a reason why someone could be fooled into thinking that heat is electricity in "rocky comets": Originally Posted by Haig This is probably the usual Thunderbolts video full of fantasies, delusions and even lies. But a lack of reading comprehension could make someone think that this video is not about Rosetta - it is about "rocky comets". __________________ NASA Finds Direct Proof of Dark Matter (another observation) (and Abell 520) Electric comets still do not exist!
 15th December 2014, 01:38 PM #2893 Reality Check Penultimate Amazing   Join Date: Mar 2008 Location: New Zealand Posts: 21,789 Originally Posted by Haig Just look at the facts and evidence and make your own mind up. It's your choice but it is fun to watch the mainstream coming around to the Electromagnetic way ☺ The facts and evidence is that: Electric comets still do not exist ! However it is a lie that "the mainstream coming around to the Electromagnetic way" (as in electric comet) because no knowledgeable scientists would be so ignorant that they would believe in the electric comet, Haig . The mainstream has always used the Electromagnetic way - just not the ignorant, invalid way that the Thunderbolts authors have used that way. This sounds like an extreme form of Haig (30th June 2014): Why do EU supporters continue to claim that astronomers ignore E fields, etc.? __________________ NASA Finds Direct Proof of Dark Matter (another observation) (and Abell 520) Electric comets still do not exist! Last edited by Reality Check; 15th December 2014 at 01:40 PM.
 15th December 2014, 01:51 PM #2894 Reality Check Penultimate Amazing   Join Date: Mar 2008 Location: New Zealand Posts: 21,789 Originally Posted by paladin17 Of course. Here they are: http://www.srl.caltech.edu/ACE/ASC/D..._plot_archive/.. Sorry, paladin17, but if you looked at those images you would see that you are wrong. These are electron fluxes, not currents. A big clue is that the units are not Amperes! About EPAM Data To get a current you have a lot of work to do, paladin17. Of course this is all moot - Electric comets still do not exist so there is no point wasting anyone's time doing any calculations about them. __________________ NASA Finds Direct Proof of Dark Matter (another observation) (and Abell 520) Electric comets still do not exist!
 15th December 2014, 02:02 PM #2895 paladin17 Student   Join Date: Dec 2014 Posts: 47 Originally Posted by Reality Check Sorry, paladin17, but if you looked at those images you would see that you are wrong. These are electron fluxes, not currents. A big clue is that the units are not Amperes! About EPAM Data Doesn't make much difference, since the current is obviously proportional to the flux. You can use those as well to evaluate how "neutral" solar wind actually is.
 15th December 2014, 02:11 PM #2896 ferd burfle Graduate Poster     Join Date: Jan 2006 Location: Just short of Zeta II Reticuli Posts: 1,378 Originally Posted by Haig It's ALL about evidence ... and here ... Rosetta Mission Update | The Rocky Comet I've viewed several of these videos you keep spamming, Haig, and all I've seen is statements like "...if it looks like rock, it's safest to assume it's rock...", false dichotomies and conspiracy theory whining. I start to suspect that the posts supporting EC and kindred "theories" are primarily about playing to the EU grandstand, not trying to present a coherent theory. "Hey you guys, you should see us over at the skeptics forum, takin' into the man!" ferd __________________ "You do not know anyone as stupid as Donald Trump. You just don’t.”-Fran Lebowitz "A target doesn't need to be preselected"-Jabba
 15th December 2014, 02:18 PM #2897 tusenfem Master Poster     Join Date: May 2008 Posts: 2,248 Originally Posted by paladin17 Doesn't make much difference, since the current is obviously proportional to the flux. You can use those as well to evaluate how "neutral" solar wind actually is. can you now? please enlighten us how you do that __________________ 20 minutes into the future This message is bra-bra-brought to you by z-z-z-zik zak And-And-And I'm going to be back with you - on Network 23 after these real-real-real-really exciting messages (Max Headroom) follow me on twitter: @tusenfem, or follow Rosetta Plasma Consortium: @Rosetta_RPC
 15th December 2014, 02:33 PM #2898 Ziggurat Penultimate Amazing     Join Date: Jun 2003 Posts: 39,414 Originally Posted by paladin17 Doesn't make much difference, since the current is obviously proportional to the flux. Yes, I suppose it is. But the constant of proportionality is zero. __________________ "As long as it is admitted that the law may be diverted from its true purpose -- that it may violate property instead of protecting it -- then everyone will want to participate in making the law, either to protect himself against plunder or to use it for plunder. Political questions will always be prejudicial, dominant, and all-absorbing. There will be fighting at the door of the Legislative Palace, and the struggle within will be no less furious." - Bastiat, The Law
 15th December 2014, 02:35 PM #2899 paladin17 Student   Join Date: Dec 2014 Posts: 47 Originally Posted by tusenfem can you now? please enlighten us how you do that Multiply the given values by the proton charge, solid angle and the area of interest.
 15th December 2014, 02:37 PM #2900 Reality Check Penultimate Amazing   Join Date: Mar 2008 Location: New Zealand Posts: 21,789 Originally Posted by paladin17 Doesn't make much difference, since the current is obviously proportional to the flux. That is right, paladin17 - the current is proportional to the combination of the proton and electron fluxes. If you want to waste your time calculating it then go ahead. But as I noted and you ignored: Originally Posted by Reality Check To get a current you have a lot of work to do, paladin17. Of course this is all moot - Electric comets still do not exist so there is no point wasting anyone's time doing any calculations about them. __________________ NASA Finds Direct Proof of Dark Matter (another observation) (and Abell 520) Electric comets still do not exist! Last edited by Reality Check; 15th December 2014 at 03:19 PM.
 15th December 2014, 06:08 PM #2901 LSSBB Devilish Dictionarian     Join Date: Oct 2011 Location: An elusive house at Bachelors Grove Cemetery Posts: 17,053 Originally Posted by Sol88 On Earth they are caused by wind Wrong __________________ "You must not let your need to be right be more important than your need to find out what's true." - Ray Dalio, Principles
 15th December 2014, 06:55 PM #2902 Reality Check Penultimate Amazing   Join Date: Mar 2008 Location: New Zealand Posts: 21,789 Originally Posted by Sol88 On Earth they are caused by wind, but on a comet??????? As LSSBB stated: Wrong (ice dune), Sol88 ! But on a comet, there could be wind that creates dunes. Comets have an atmosphere - all of the gas that is outgassed. We see the jets doing just that on 67P. This atmosphere is being heated on one side of the comet and cooled on the other. That is a high pressure area on one side and a low pressure area on the other. Gases flow from high pressure to low pressure. This flow is called wind, Sol88! The shape of 67P is complex so it is not as simple as winds from the hot side of a sphere to the cold side. P.S. Personally I have doubts about this as a viable mechanism for the 67P dunes. ETA: A feast of comet features from Rosetta at Churyumov-Gerasimenko Quote: I called them "rhythmic ridges" because to call them dunes -- even if we all know that they couldn't have formed from wind or water saltating sand grains across a plain -- is to imply a cause. When you encounter unfamiliar worlds, it's all too easy to name things with terms that imply a cause and then fall into the linguistic trap that that sets up for you. It's how we got to seeing water in the "canali" on Mars. Of course, trying to avoid these pitfalls can give us really horrible names for geomorphic features, like the "recurring slope lineae" on Mars. "Canali" sounds so much more poetic. confirms my doubts. There are other possibilities. People who do science are familiar with fluidized beds. So gas bubbling up into dust can transport the dust. Fluidization and multiphase transport of particulate cometary material as an explanation of the smooth terrains and repetitive outbursts on 9P/Tempel 1 The dunes are on a smooth slope "downhill" into the neck and they look just like slippages. __________________ NASA Finds Direct Proof of Dark Matter (another observation) (and Abell 520) Electric comets still do not exist! Last edited by Reality Check; 15th December 2014 at 07:10 PM.
 15th December 2014, 07:01 PM #2903 LSSBB Devilish Dictionarian     Join Date: Oct 2011 Location: An elusive house at Bachelors Grove Cemetery Posts: 17,053 Originally Posted by Reality Check As LSSBB stated: Wrong (ice dune), Sol88 ! But on a comet, there could be wind that creates dunes. Comets have an atmosphere - all of the gas that is outgassed. We see the jets doing just that on 67P. This atmosphere is being heated on one side of the comet and cooled on the other. That is a high pressure area on one side and a low pressure area on the other. Gases flow from high pressure to low pressure. This flow is called wind, Sol88! The shape of 67P is complex so it is not as simple as winds from the hot side of a sphere to the cold side. There are other possibilities. People who do science are familiar with fluidized beds. So gas bubbling up into dust can transport the dust. Fluidization and multiphase transport of particulate cometary material as an explanation of the smooth terrains and repetitive outbursts on 9P/Tempel 1 Note the gas being outgassed has a high water content. Quite analogous to the water spray that builds up Earth's ice dunes, don't year think? __________________ "You must not let your need to be right be more important than your need to find out what's true." - Ray Dalio, Principles
 15th December 2014, 07:03 PM #2904 LSSBB Devilish Dictionarian     Join Date: Oct 2011 Location: An elusive house at Bachelors Grove Cemetery Posts: 17,053 Duplicate post __________________ "You must not let your need to be right be more important than your need to find out what's true." - Ray Dalio, Principles
 15th December 2014, 08:11 PM #2905 Cygnus_X1 Student   Join Date: Mar 2009 Location: United States Posts: 45 Responding to some claims in Haig's post #2868, my responses repeatedly thwarted by quotes with imbedded URLs. As I noted in my post #2820, as well as my articles on the REAL electric universe, mainstream astronomy knows of many examples of electric fields forming in space and in particular near comets. Many of these traceable back decades. EU just tries to hijack these, claiming it as 'their' idea when they did no work whatsoever to demonstrate the mechanism could work. Notice not one of EU 'predictions' contains information sufficient for planning a mission such as Rosetta, where you would need to know, say, the maximum electric field produced in the comet environment in order for the spacecraft to survive. Others have done these, and get numbers like what I noted in post #2820. Not the millions of volts invoked by EU. EU is like the old joke "When your only tool is a hammer, everything starts to look like a nail.", they can't imagine any other mechanism at work, when mechanics of solids, fluids, and gases made things work years, centuries, before we could harness electricity. If EU wants to claim the solar wind is driven by an EXTERNAL electric field, have they bothered to compute what the magnitude and distribution of the field must be to explain the solar wind velocity profile? What charge distribution can produce it? I've seen no such analysis from EU. If I pop a balloon, the air that was contained within expands outward. It goes from zero to some expansion velocity, i.e. it accelerates. Why? Was an electric field responsible? Mainstream astronomy recognizes that electric fields can form in plasmas under various non-equilibrium conditions where charge separation can occur. There are hydrodynamic solar wind models which just treat the flow as a free expansion, like the balloon example above. It actually gives a good match for the acceleration of the slow solar wind (Parker model). Where is EU's model of the solar wind acceleration with their claimed electric field values? For higher speeds, other mechanisms are at play and kinetic models reveal a good match where feedback mechanism can setup a wind acceleration with voltages of 300-1000 volts between the exobase in the solar corona and Earth orbit. Nowhere near the millions of volts invoked by EU. Plus, these kinetic models generate these voltages due to the different velocities of electrons and ions. The electrons get a little extra kick from the photons from the photosphere. I've done analyses of the solar wind claims of Scott, Thornhill's 'solar resistor' and their implications for spaceflight. EU supporters always whine and cry that I've done it wrong, but they never present the proper analysis. Like a bunch of inept middle managers, EU supporters insist that others do the work and they'll hang around to take credit for it. Meanwhile EU is invoking gigantic electric fields driven by mysterious, invisible generators or batteries (they usually hide behind the term 'double layer') that magically appear wherever they choose to invoke them.
 16th December 2014, 01:51 AM #2906 tusenfem Master Poster     Join Date: May 2008 Posts: 2,248 Originally Posted by paladin17 Multiply the given values by the proton charge, solid angle and the area of interest. wow, if life were just that easy. __________________ 20 minutes into the future This message is bra-bra-brought to you by z-z-z-zik zak And-And-And I'm going to be back with you - on Network 23 after these real-real-real-really exciting messages (Max Headroom) follow me on twitter: @tusenfem, or follow Rosetta Plasma Consortium: @Rosetta_RPC
 16th December 2014, 04:32 AM #2908 Haig Graduate Poster     Join Date: Feb 2010 Posts: 1,635 Just as an afterthought Tom. What do you think of this ... ??? (but ignoring the black hole nonsense) Extragalactic circuits, transmission lines, and CR particle acceleration Quote: A non-negligible fraction of a Supermassive Black Hole's (SMBH) rest mass energy gets transported into extragalactic space by a remarkable process in jets which are incompletely understood. What are the physical processes which transport this energy? It is likely that the energy flows electromagnetically, rather than via a particle beam flux. The deduced electromagnetic fields may produce particles of energy as high as ∼1020 eV. The energetics of SMBH accretion disk models and the electromagnetic energy transfer imply that a SMBH should generate a 1018−1019 Amp\eres current close to the black hole and its accretion disk. We describe the so far best observation-based estimate of the magnitude of the current flow along the axis of the jet extending from the nucleus of the active galaxy in 3C303. The current is measured to be I∼1018 Amp\eres at ∼40 kpc away from the AGN. This indicates that organized current flow remains intact over multi-kpc distances. The electric current I transports electromagnetic power into free space, P=I2Z, where Z∼30 Ohms is related to the impedance of free space, and this points to the existence of cosmic electric circuit. The associated electric potential drop, V=IZ, is of the order of that required to generate Ultra High Energy Cosmic Rays (UHECR). We describe the analogy of electromagnetically dominated jets with transmission lines. High powered jets {\it in vacuo} can be understood by approximate analogy with a waveguide. The importance of inductance, impedance, and other laboratory electrical concepts are discussed in this context. To appear in Proc. 18th International Symposium on Very High Energy Cosmic Ray Interactions (ISVHECR2014), CERN, Switzerland Last edited by Haig; 16th December 2014 at 04:58 AM.
 16th December 2014, 05:36 AM #2909 JeanTate Graduate Poster   Join Date: Nov 2014 Posts: 1,679 Good morning Tom. As you still can't post links, I thought I'd add them on this post of yours (source is ADS). Originally Posted by Cygnus_X1 Whew! The holidays have me way too busy to follow all this thread. But here's a few relevant tidbits. It appears Thornhill is coming across some older little-known papers, and quietly integrated them into his claims. Many people think that Velikovsky did a similar trick 'predicting' a hot Venus since there were loads of mainstream publications suggesting this prior to Velikovsky's 'prediction'. The comet 'eruptions' do have an 'electric' explanation in the context of the standard comet model. A lot of this work on dusty plasmas in space, and application to comets, has been done by D.A. Mendis going back to the 1970s. Consider: K. R. Flammer, B. Jackson, and D. A. Mendis. On the brightness variations of Comet Halley at large heliocentric distances. Earth Moon and Planets, 35:203–212, July 1986. doi: 10.1007/BF00058065. The brightness eruption by Halley occurred as the comet passed through a stream of high-speed solar wind (standard solar model, corresponding to 'open' magnetic field lines from the Sun). The difference in charging due to the different velocities of electrons and protons can set up a fairly large voltage difference (sometimes called ambipolar diffusion), calculated to be as high as -2500 Volts between the day and night sides of a dusty body like a comet. This voltage difference can launch a large amount of dust off the surface of the comet. Other relevant publications: M. Horanyi and D. A. Mendis. Trajectories of charged dust grains in the cometary environment. Astrophysical Journal, 294:357–368, July 1985. doi: 10.1086/163303. M. Horanyi and D. A. Mendis. The effects of electrostatic charging on the dust distribution at Halley’s Comet. Astrophysical Journal, 307:800–807, August 1986. doi: 10.1086/164466. W.-H. Ip and D. A. Mendis. The cometary magnetic field and its associated electric currents. Icarus, 26: 457–461, December 1975. doi: 10.1016/0019-1035(75)90115-3. W.-H. Ip and D. A. Mendis. The generation of magnetic fields and electric currents in cometary plasma tails. Icarus, 29:147–151, September 1976. doi: 10.1016/0019-1035(76)90110-X. D. A. Mendis, J. R. Hill, H. L. F. Houpis, and E. C. Whipple. On the electrostatic charging of the cometary nucleus. Astrophysical Journal, 249:787–797, October 1981. doi: 10.1086/159337. Some of these reference work on these ideas going back into the 1960s. Why are there so many publications in ApJ dealing with electric fields in comets when Electric Universe supporters claim astronomers ignore electric fields in space? Note a number of additional aspects Electric Comet supporters ignore. 1) these computations are only valid in the context of the standard solar model and the standard comet model. You can't just hack them onto the 'Electric Comet' model as the claimed compositions and initial electrical configurations are very different. 2) Researchers are actually able to compute this quantities using our mainstream understanding of electromagnetism, plasma physics and atomic physics. The comets are not electrodes held at a voltage relative to the Sun. We still have no computationally testable model from the Electric Comet/Sun/Planet/whatever supporters. If mainstream science has such a 'wrong' understanding of the space environment, why are these missions, designed under the constraints of the standard models of the environment, so successful? Tom
 16th December 2014, 05:45 AM #2910 JeanTate Graduate Poster   Join Date: Nov 2014 Posts: 1,679 Good morning, Haig. Originally Posted by Haig Just as an afterthought Tom. What do you think of this ... ??? (but ignoring the black hole nonsense) Extragalactic circuits, transmission lines, and CR particle acceleration Do you know how to find the references in a paper (or a preprint, in this case)? Having the references in hand, do you know how to find those references (mostly papers)? Given that papers are primary sources in this branch of science, don't you think such simple skills as being able to find references is important? Based on your posting history, I would guess that you have close to zero idea of how many papers like that arXiv preprint have been published, stretching back to before your heroes were even born. Would you say it is fair to characterize your apparent extreme lack of knowledge of primary sources as ignorance?
 16th December 2014, 06:10 AM #2911 Haig Graduate Poster     Join Date: Feb 2010 Posts: 1,635 Then Tom there is this to consider ... Electric Comets need an Electric Sun But our Sun is entering a Grand Solar Minimum (how does that square with the fusion model ??) NASA say HERE Quote: Indeed, the sun could be on the threshold of a mini-Maunder event right now. Ongoing Solar Cycle 24 is the weakest in more than 50 years. Moreover, there is (controversial) evidence of a long-term weakening trend in the magnetic field strength of sunspots. Matt Penn and William Livingston of the National Solar Observatory predict that by the time Solar Cycle 25 arrives, magnetic fields on the sun will be so weak that few if any sunspots will be formed. Independent lines of research involving helioseismology and surface polar fields tend to support their conclusion. Could our failing Sun be causing the failing / shifting magnetic field of the Earth ? The World Magnetic Model Magnetic Field Updates video clip Whacha recon Tom ... just a coincidence ??? Then there is this from our ELECTRIC SUN... Voyager 1 Experiences Three "Tsunami Waves" in Interstellar Space Quote: Published on 15 Dec 2014 The Voyager 1 spacecraft has experienced three "tsunami waves" in interstellar space. This kind of wave occurs as a result of a coronal mass ejection erupting from the sun. The most recent tsunami wave that Voyager experienced began in February 2014, and may still be going. Listen to how these waves cause surrounding ionized matter to ring like a bell. NASA Voyager: 'Tsunami Wave' Still Flies Through Interstellar Space Quote: A "tsunami wave" occurs when the sun emits a coronal mass ejection, throwing out a magnetic cloud of plasma from its surface. This generates a wave of pressure. When the wave runs into the interstellar plasma -- the charged particles found in the space between the stars -- a shock wave results that perturbs the plasma. "The tsunami causes the ionized gas that is out there to resonate -- "sing" or vibrate like a bell," said Ed Stone, project scientist for the Voyager mission based at California Institute of Technology in Pasadena. This is the third shock wave that Voyager 1 has experienced. The first event was in October to November of 2012, and the second wave in April to May of 2013 revealed an even higher plasma density. Voyager 1 detected the most recent event in February, and it is still going on as of November data. The spacecraft has moved outward 250 million miles (400 million kilometers) during the third event. "This remarkable event raises questions that will stimulate new studies of the nature of shocks in the interstellar medium," said Leonard Burlaga, astrophysicist emeritus at NASA Goddard Spaceflight Center in Greenbelt, Maryland, who analyzed the magnetic field data that were key to these results. Last edited by Haig; 16th December 2014 at 06:11 AM.
 16th December 2014, 06:31 AM #2912 Belz... Fiend God     Join Date: Oct 2005 Location: In the details Posts: 72,392 It's amazing how all this has still nothing to do with an electric universe. __________________ Master of the Shining Darkness
 16th December 2014, 06:51 AM #2913 tusenfem Master Poster     Join Date: May 2008 Posts: 2,248 I almost felt sorry for haig when we were so "harsh" to him. Well, that evaporated quickly enough, now he comes with a bizillion quotes again, telling Tom he does not know the history of "electromagnetic space science" and then comes with quotes from the late 1800s when the term "electrical" meant basically everything, from electricity to light. That from a self-proclaimed physics an-alphabetical. But hey, real science is not done by youtube, so I guess haig will never learn anything except for thunderdolts stuff, coz dey got boobtube, ahsoohm! __________________ 20 minutes into the future This message is bra-bra-brought to you by z-z-z-zik zak And-And-And I'm going to be back with you - on Network 23 after these real-real-real-really exciting messages (Max Headroom) follow me on twitter: @tusenfem, or follow Rosetta Plasma Consortium: @Rosetta_RPC
 16th December 2014, 07:43 AM #2915 Haig Graduate Poster     Join Date: Feb 2010 Posts: 1,635 Originally Posted by tusenfem But hey, real science is not done by , so I guess haig will never learn anything except for thunderdolts stuff, coz dey got boobtube, ahsoohm! Sure it is tusenfem Your European Space Agency is right into youtube Ambition the film A bit too much on the creationist side for me but hey! that's where mainstream science is NOW with the magical black stuff and big bang creation
 16th December 2014, 08:00 AM #2917 Jrrarglblarg Guest   Join Date: Nov 2010 Posts: 12,673 Originally Posted by Haig Sure it is tusenfem Your European Space Agency is right into youtube Ambition the film A bit too much on the creationist side for me but hey! that's where mainstream science is NOW with the magical black stuff and big bang creation Lol. Your answer to "science is not done by YouTube" is to present a piece of promotional artfilm? I begin to understand your difficulty - you don't know what science actually looks like.
 16th December 2014, 08:39 AM #2918 Haig Graduate Poster     Join Date: Feb 2010 Posts: 1,635 Originally Posted by ApolloGnomon Lol. Your answer to "science is not done by YouTube" is to present a piece of promotional artfilm? I begin to understand your difficulty - you don't know what science actually looks like. Really! 😂 And the magical black stuff and big bang creation ? Are those artistic too ? 😂
 16th December 2014, 08:49 AM #2919 Jrrarglblarg Guest   Join Date: Nov 2010 Posts: 12,673 Originally Posted by Haig Really! 😂 And the magical black stuff and big bang creation ? Are those artistic too ? 😂 You really are incapable of responding intelligently, aren't you?
 16th December 2014, 01:00 PM #2920 Reality Check Penultimate Amazing   Join Date: Mar 2008 Location: New Zealand Posts: 21,789 67P is grey! 50 Shades of 67/P So much for Haig's obsession with a single red tinted image of 67P. __________________ NASA Finds Direct Proof of Dark Matter (another observation) (and Abell 520) Electric comets still do not exist!

International Skeptics Forum

 Bookmarks Digg del.icio.us StumbleUpon Google Reddit