Continuation The Electric Comet Theory Boogaloo (Part 2)

Status
Not open for further replies.
jonesdave116 said:
More nonsense. As has already been pointed out ad nauseam, the solar wind is nowhere near dense enough, by umpteen orders of magnitude, to account for just 1 litre of H2O production. How about the 100+ l/s that were seen at perihelion? Or the 30 000 l/s at Halley? Or the 200 000 l/s at Hale-Bopp?

Try again.
Click to expand...

I think you are wrong! :blush:

The comet is acting as part of a capacitor, the outer plate collecting current to be focused down onto the comet surface, so your first mistake is to assume only the surface of the comet nucleus is available as a collecting area this was show to be the case with the TSSR-1 experiment.

Seems have more than enough H and O and C on a comets surface in the form of simple to complex hydrocarbons and an ELECTRIC current/field to make "stuff" happen! ;)
 
Sol88 said:
Yeah whoops missed the strike thru on the space craft observing, good pick up, cheers. :thumbsup:
Click to expand...


But if you merely neglected to strike through the original text, it would still appear in your quote, would it not, dear Sol? Whoops indeed.:rolleyes:
 
Sol88 said:
I think you are wrong! :blush:

The comet is acting as part of a capacitor, the outer plate collecting current to be focused down onto the comet surface, so your first mistake is to assume only the surface of the comet nucleus is available as a collecting area this was show to be the case with the TSSR-1 experiment.

Seems have more than enough H and O and C on a comets surface in the form of simple to complex hydrocarbons and an ELECTRIC current/field to make "stuff" happen! ;)
Click to expand...

Yet you keep not giving HOW that would work. Or how that magically makes the solar wind near a comet increase in density a million or more fold without being detected.

By the way, how are the experimental proofs for EC coming along? Did they reproduce the comet effect in a vacuum yet?
 
Sol88 said:
I think you are wrong! :blush:

The comet is acting as part of a capacitor, the outer plate collecting current to be focused down onto the comet surface, so your first mistake is to assume only the surface of the comet nucleus is available as a collecting area this was show to be the case with the TSSR-1 experiment.

Seems have more than enough H and O and C on a comets surface in the form of simple to complex hydrocarbons and an ELECTRIC current/field to make "stuff" happen!
Click to expand...

Only too bad that the plasma instruments do not measure these "focused currents" or the necessary electric fields ...
 
Sol88 said:
I think you are wrong! :blush:

The comet is acting as part of a capacitor, the outer plate collecting current to be focused down onto the comet surface, so your first mistake is to assume only the surface of the comet nucleus is available as a collecting area this was show to be the case with the TSSR-1 experiment.

Seems have more than enough H and O and C on a comets surface in the form of simple to complex hydrocarbons and an ELECTRIC current/field to make "stuff" happen! ;)
Click to expand...

Lol.
 
Sol88 said:
I think you are wrong! :blush:

The comet is acting as part of a capacitor, the outer plate collecting current to be focused down onto the comet surface, so your first mistake is to assume only the surface of the comet nucleus is available as a collecting area this was show to be the case with the TSSR-1 experiment.

Seems have more than enough H and O and C on a comets surface in the form of simple to complex hydrocarbons and an ELECTRIC current/field to make "stuff" happen! ;)
Click to expand...

And once the diamagnetic cavity forms, as seen at Halley and 67P? When no solar wind is reaching the surface? How does a comet carry on outgassing in that situation?
Which additional unevidenced/ impossible mechanism do we need to call on then to keep this quasi-religion going?
 
List of 43 items of ignorance. lies and delusions from Sol88

Sol88 said:
The comet is acting as part of a capacitor, ....
Click to expand...
Totally ignorant and delusional non-science, Sol88.

A list of 29 items of ignorance, lies and delusions from Sol88 over the last 6 years (and not all of them!).
  1. 4 November 2015 Sol88: What is the electric comet explanation for the origin of some jets from the walls of pits on 67P?
  2. 4 November 2015 Sol88: What is the electric comet explanation for the locations that jets have been traced to on 67P (the neck, not highest points)?
  3. 4 November 2015 Sol88: Do you understand the idiocy of that question about a hypothetical mainstream mechanism for narrow jets on Comet 19P?
  4. 4 November 2015 Sol88: David Talbott is deluded enough to extend the fantasies of Immanuel Velikovsky.
  5. 4 November 2015 Sol88: Wal Thornhill is a follower of the fantasies of Immanuel Velikovsky.
  6. 5 November 2015 Sol88: Yet another repeated, irrelevant question about the mainstream science of comets and their jets!
  7. 6 November 2015 Sol88: It is a lie that there are no explanations about how comet "jets are formed, maintained and collimated".
  8. 6 November 2015 Sol88: The expectation of seeing DUSTY PLASMA, etc. in a paper about Geologic control of jet formation on Comet 103P/Hartley 2!
  9. 9 November 2015 Sol88: A lie about the contents of a dusty plasma video which is about the dusty plasma processes on the surfaces on airless planetary objects (i.e. not comets).
  10. 11 November 2015 Sol88: Lying about comets by inane replacement of text to make a coherent paragraph about the lunar surface into Sol88 gibberish!
  11. 11 November 2015 Sol88: A new delusion that comets do not contain dust or even rocks.
  12. 11 November 2015 Sol88: The repeated delusion that the Stardust mission finding that some comet dust formed in the inner solar system means that comets are rocks.
  13. 11 November 2015 Sol88: A repeated lie about the Stardust mission results - the dust contained a mixture of low and high minerals.
  14. 11 November 2015 Sol88: The delusion that in situ detection of oxygen molecules is a problem for real comets.
133 days and counting of fear of physics: 25 June 2015 Sol88: Use a impact calculator to calculate the size of the crater on a comet made of rock by the Deep Impact impactor.
 
Last edited:
Sol88: Lies about a 2009 Water on Mercury article

Sol88 said:
Still doesn't change the facts :rolleyes:
Click to expand...
That you lied about what you quoted, Sol88?
11 November 2015 Sol88: Lying about comets by inane replacement of text to make a coherent paragraph about the lunar surface into Sol88 gibberish!

It is a lie that Water on Mercury is about "signs of OH, H2O and Ice". The article is about the implication of water ice at the planet’s poles from the detection of water vapor on Mercury. The article is from 2009 and so before the 2012 detection of water ice.

It is a lie that the Water on Mercury is stated to be water created by the same mechanism as one the Moon.
When NASA’s MESSENGER spacecraft flew past Mercury in 2008, it also discovered the presence of water vapor in the thin atmosphere that surrounds Mercury. This atmosphere, or more precisely “exosphere”, is created when particles from the Sun’s solar wind bombard Mercury and kick up atoms into its atmosphere. It’s possible that the solar wind is kicking up water from the ice deposits at Mercury’s poles, or maybe it’s coming from cometary fragments. Or maybe the solar wind is depositing the oxygen and hydrogen atoms on Mercury’s surface in the first place.
Click to expand...
The article gets the last mechanism wrong.

Mercury
Water vapor is present, released by a combination of processes such as: comets striking its surface, sputtering creating water out of hydrogen from the solar wind and oxygen from rock, and sublimation from reservoirs of water ice in the permanently shadowed polar craters. ...
On November 29, 2012, NASA confirmed that images from MESSENGER had detected that craters at the north pole contained water ice.
Click to expand...

12 November 2015 Sol88: Lies about a 2009 Water on Mercury article.
 
jonesdave116 said:
And once the diamagnetic cavity forms, as seen at Halley and 67P? When no solar wind is reaching the surface? How does a comet carry on outgassing in that situation?
Which additional unevidenced/ impossible mechanism do we need to call on then to keep this quasi-religion going?
Click to expand...

Same way as capacitor works, charge is induced.

Same way it works for the Earths Magnetosphere/Ionosphere/Atmosphere/Lithosphere connection.

52876main_leakycondensor.jpg


Comets also have a Magnetosphere/Ionosphere/Atmosphere/Lithosphere

and the energetic "jet" outbursts may play the role of the thunderstorms, acting as the return circuit.

https://www.thunderbolts.info/tpod/2004/arch/040927earth-capacitor.htm

or because thunderbolts a crackpots, we'll use a "reputable" source

https://www.ece.ufl.edu/content/earth-and-its-atmosphere-leaky-spherical-capacitor


or for those that love maths, a powerpoint presention

Seems all things immersed in the solar plasma act similar!

Charge, store, discharge!!
 
Last edited:
Sol88 said:
Same way as capacitor works, charge is induced.

Same way it works for the Earths Magnetosphere/Ionosphere/Atmosphere/Lithosphere connection.

[qimg]http://www.nasa.gov/images/content/52876main_leakycondensor.jpg[/qimg]

Comets also have a Magnetosphere/Ionosphere/Atmosphere/Lithosphere

and the energetic "jet" outbursts may play the role of the thunderstorms, acting as the return circuit.

https://www.thunderbolts.info/tpod/2004/arch/040927earth-capacitor.htm

or because thunderbolts a crackpots, we'll use a "reputable" source

https://www.ece.ufl.edu/content/earth-and-its-atmosphere-leaky-spherical-capacitor


or for those that love maths, a powerpoint presention

Seems all things immersed in the solar plasma act similar!

Charge, store, discharge!!
Click to expand...

Sorry, but what has any of that crap got to do with the fact that we already know that comets have ice beneath their surface? Or did I miss that? Where is this electric woo? And why don't we see it?
See where you are Sol? Same place as you were in 15 months ago. Zero evidence, and still talking sh**e. Some things never change.
 
16 more items of ignorance and delusions from Sol88 for over 6 years

jonesdave116 said:
See where you are Sol? Same place as you were in 15 months ago. Zero evidence, and still talking sh**e. Some things never change.
Click to expand...
Forget 15 months - Sol88 has been regurgitating this Thunderbolts rubbish for over 6 years :jaw-dropp!
A list of 43 items of ignorance, lies and delusions from Sol88 for over 6 years (and not all of them!).
Some of the things that are not in the list are:
  1. 10 July 2009 Sol88: Thinks that ignorance about comets is support for the EC delusion by asking several times about a "Identification of comet Hyakutake's extremely long ion tail from magnetic field signatures" paper.
  2. 10 July 2009 Sol88: The still held delusion that comets are made up of rock because Stardust detected minerals in dust particles.
  3. 10 July 2009 Sol88: Persistent denial of science - in this case Deep Impact and "Observations also revealed that the comet was about 75% empty space".
  4. 11 July 2009 Sol88: Thought that a conference poster by the ignorant (and now known liar) Wal Thronhill was a scientific model even when explicitly told that it was not!
  5. 13 July 2009 Sol88: A delusion that the density of 19P/Borrelly (measured to be 0.3 g/cc) would be 3-4 g/cc just because Sol88 says it would be!
  6. 24 July 2009 Sol88: Cites the measured mass of an asteroid, was ignorant that it was measured the same way that comet masses and thought this was evidence the comet masses are wrong!
  7. 25 July 2009 Sol88: First (of many) parroting of Thornhill's 2 flashes lie: "Thornhill PREDICTED two flashes and there they where!"
  8. 25 July 2009 Sol88: A lies of his own or Thornhill again? " the first tiny little flash overloaded the main mission cameras and the subsequent frames show the highly energetic "bang"!"
  9. 28 July 2009 Sol88: Ignorance that ice is used to calculate the densities of comets - it is the calculated comet densities that show that comets are made of ices and dust.
  10. 30 July 2009 Sol88: This may be the start of the continuing delusion that scientists being surprised abut comets means comets are rocks!
  11. 4 August 2009 Sol88: Lied about comet science after Tim Thompson (see below) explicitly stated that we expect jets all over a comet (mostly on the sunlit side, some on the dark side).
  12. 5 August 2009 Sol88: Lied about "standard model has been falsified and made invalid" - fact-less rants and ignorance of the standard model did not make it invalid!
  13. 5 August 2009 Sol88: Repeats a fantasy that the standard model includes electrical discharges (that is the EC delusion!).
  14. 5 August 2009 Sol88: Parrots "forbidden lines" and astronomy ignorance from "Mr. Holocrap" as tusenfem points out.
  15. 10 August 2009 Sol88: Ignores the foundation of the current real science about comets - Fred Whipple's original papers.
  16. 14 August 2009 Sol88: Parrots "forbidden lines" and astronomy ignorance from "Mr. Holocrap" again!
Some of the still denied science:
14th July 2009, tusenfem presents science about the x-ray emissions and asks for the EC predictions. 6 years of deafening silence (other the repeating Thunderbolts fantasies) from Sol88.
19th July 2009, Tim Thompson explains about non-gravitational forces (jets!) and cites "Sosa & Fernández, 2009 where comet masses are computed from non-gravitational forces". No sign for the last 6 years that Sol88 understands that the multiple ways for measuring comet masses and so density rules out the delusion that comets are rocks.
4th August 2009, Tim Thompson points out the asymmetry of jets on comets (Wild 2 has 2 jets out of 20 on the dark side) is "quite sufficient asymmetry to show that solar heating is the primary driver" and tried to explain more science to Sol88.
5th August 2009, tusenfem: I guess Mr. Holocrap does not really know what "forbidden lines" are.
 
Last edited:
jonesdave116 said:
Sorry, but what has any of that crap got to do with the fact that we already know that comets have ice beneath their surface?
Click to expand...

I think he's claiming that the ice fragments/grains detected came from ice covering the surface of a rocky body, and that ice got there because so much H20 was generated (in an ECH manner) that there was enough to anti-sublimate onto the rock.
 
jonesdave116 said:
Sorry, but what has any of that crap got to do with the fact that we already know that comets have ice beneath their surface? Or did I miss that? Where is this electric woo? And why don't we see it?
See where you are Sol? Same place as you were in 15 months ago. Zero evidence, and still talking sh**e. Some things never change.
Click to expand...

Jonedave116, what are the boulders, littering the surface, composition?

ICE or DUST?
 
Matthew Cline said:
I think he's claiming that the ice fragments/grains detected came from ice covering the surface of a rocky body, and that ice got there because so much H20 was generated (in an ECH manner) that there was enough to anti-sublimate onto the rock.
Click to expand...

:thumbsup:

Spot on!
 
Sol88 said:
:thumbsup:

Spot on!
Click to expand...

Except you STILL do not explain how that ice can be formed when the necessary amount of solar winds for that model are not detected. In fact, they are so much lower that they approach zero for the model you propose.
So given your model and the actual measurements there should be no water detected at a comet, and there clearly is.
Now what could be wrong?
The measurements of a machine built by hundreds of people using tried and proven techniques?
Or the unproven and mathematically unsupported theory of a few internet posters who refuse to actually test their theory?
 
Sol88 said:
:thumbsup:

Spot on!
Click to expand...

If EDM is liberating oxygen from the surface of a rocky body, how would ice stay formed on the surface? Wouldn't the EDM scour the ice off just as soon as any formed?

Lukraak_Sisser said:
Except you STILL do not explain how that ice can be formed when the necessary amount of solar winds for that model are not detected.
Click to expand...

I think the claim is that the comet has such a large negative charge that it pulls in positive hydrogen ions from solar wind a long distance away from the comet, and/or pushes OH- ions out over a large area to catch more solar wind. Of course, various objections to that have already been brought up.
 
Obviously the people who built the machine designed it to support their view of Comets which is wrong. They didn't build it to detect what is actualy happening.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Share this page

ISF - Join now!

Every member here is approved by hand. No bots, no spam, just people who care about evidence and honest debate.

Membership is free!

Create your free account

Back
Top Bottom