Sol88
Philosopher
- Joined
- Mar 23, 2009
- Messages
- 8,437
Continuation The Electric Comet Theory Boogaloo (Part 2)
- Thread starter Sol88
- Start date
- Status
jedi
jonesdave116
Philosopher
- Joined
- Feb 26, 2015
- Messages
- 6,222
Whistling in the wind, more like. What has that got to do with the fact that YOU posted that jets coming from the comet were caused by electrostatic forces? Then I posted incontrovertible evidence showing that the dust jets are correlated with gas production. Extremely well correlated. It's how they get the best idea of where to look for gas.
So YOU post something about the modelling of processes in the cometary tail from 1979, before we'd even visited Halley?????
WHAT IS THE RELEVANCE???
What has that got to do with dust jets being caused by sublimation of gas. Unambiguously??????
Pseudoscience 101, yet again. Ignore, obfuscate and distract.
Let's get back to where YOU think this dust (and gas) is coming from, and how YOU think it is getting into the coma in the first place. And then we can get on to the (total lack of) evidence for it.
Reality Check
Penultimate Amazing
That is not what I meant, Sol88:
You, Sol88, have kept the delusion that comets are rocks and have electrical discharges for over 6 years now
. I expect that any information given to you will be lied about to support that delusion. Thus it is useless to tell you about an instrument that is measuring the plasma environment of 67P, i.e. the RPC-LAP Langmuir probe.Why you picked that instrument seems to be the totally ignorantly highlighted quote in your post that includes "weak electric currents" as in
26 November 2015 Sol88 - do you think that this basic physics about plasma is about your delusions that comets are rocks and have electrical discharges?
Reality Check
Penultimate Amazing
Which leaves no post contents at all, Sol88
!26 November 2015 Sol88 - do you think that this basic physics about plasma is about your delusions that comets are rocks and have electrical discharges?
Reality Check
Penultimate Amazing
An obsession with Holger Sierks is not science, Sol88
.List of 72 items of ignorance, lies and delusions from Sol88 has
16 November 2015 Sol88: The delusion that research he imagines to exist must exist (e.g. the composition of receding cliffs on Tempel 1)! to which we need to add:
27 November 2015 Sol88: The delusion that observations that he wants will be made, e.g. a "video/time lapse" of active regions.
148 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.
Reality Check
Penultimate Amazing
Sol88: Another example of your inability to understand science
.
Electric Comets III: Mass vs. Charge
Tom Bridgman did an analysis of your delusion via Thunderbolts that the mass (and thus density) of 67P was calculated wrongly because of electrostatic forces.
Then a chap called Harvey, (Prof. Harvey Rutt), unaware of Tom's previous work, worked it out on the Rosetta blog in answer to the usual pseudoscientific ravings of one of the educationally challenged on there ... 35 gigavolt charge
The actual measured voltage by RPC-LAP (the instrument you think is a game changer :eek)was ~10 volts.
This is nothing to do with Cluster.
27 November 2015 Sol88: Another example of your inability to understand science or even English!
Displaying your ignorance of science and English is not good, Sol88
.Electric Comets III: Mass vs. Charge
Tom Bridgman did an analysis of your delusion via Thunderbolts that the mass (and thus density) of 67P was calculated wrongly because of electrostatic forces.
Then a chap called Harvey, (Prof. Harvey Rutt), unaware of Tom's previous work, worked it out on the Rosetta blog in answer to the usual pseudoscientific ravings of one of the educationally challenged on there ... 35 gigavolt charge
The actual measured voltage by RPC-LAP (the instrument you think is a game changer :eek)was ~10 volts.
This is nothing to do with Cluster.
27 November 2015 Sol88: Another example of your inability to understand science or even English!
jonesdave116
Philosopher
- Joined
- Feb 26, 2015
- Messages
- 6,222
No, nothing to do with "entrained" dust. How about actually reading some of the stuff you post? Or is there no point, as you don't understand it?
Where in that paper is it suggested that these phenomena, observed in the Earth's magnetotail, have anything to do with dust coming from a cometary surface?
Please explain. Why is all this dust correlated with gas coming from the SURFACE?
And, yes, the comet tutorial is very interesting. I've had it for a few years. You should try reading it. More to the point, try understanding it.
Reality Check
Penultimate Amazing
What that post seems actually about is Sol88 mindlessly supporting yet another Thunderbolts delusion. The Thunderbolts cult "prophets" are
- David Talbot - a deluded mythologist.
- Wal Thornhill - a deluded physicist who has lied about "confirmed" Deep Impact "predictions").
- Donald Scott - a deluded retired electrical engineer who still cannot understand that fusion in the core of the Sun is required by the laws of physics and confirmed by the detection of the predicted neutrino flux.
March 23, 2008, "The Electric Sky, Short-Circuited" (PDF) by Tom Bridgman mentions the Cluster satellite in the context of magnetic reconnection (one of Scott's denial of science).
Reality Check
Penultimate Amazing
An insanely ignorant statement, Sol88.
That "Interaction with interplanetary medium" is badly cited from the dubious Plasma Universe web site which has a page listing mostly mainstream (and outdated!) science about comets.
Comet
Where Plasma Universe goes crankish is expecting Birkeland currents around comets, "Kristian Birkeland's theory", "macroscopic electric double layers". more "Birkeland currents", and maybe "current discharges into the atmosphere from the tail".
That first mainstream prediction has been already observed at 67P
!
Last edited:
Reality Check
Penultimate Amazing
Sol88: Yet another abysmal lack of reading comprehension
jonesdave116 gave you links to current science about dust being blown off 67P by sublimating ices. And you cite a 1979 paper "Currents in the cometary atmosphere"
!
27 November 2015 Sol88: Yet another abysmal lack of reading comprehension!
Really dumb citation, Sol88.
jonesdave116 gave you links to current science about dust being blown off 67P by sublimating ices. And you cite a 1979 paper "Currents in the cometary atmosphere"
that is nothing to do with his post
!27 November 2015 Sol88: Yet another abysmal lack of reading comprehension!
Last edited:
Reality Check
Penultimate Amazing
Sol88: The delusion that Earth's magnetotail is a comet jet with "entrained" dust
!
Intense current sheets in the magnetotail: Peculiarities of electron physics
If I thought that you were actually reading the science rather than writing kneejerk delusions then that would be a point of ignorance, not a delusion. But your track record says that is this case.
Like yet another example of delusion, Sol88
!Intense current sheets in the magnetotail: Peculiarities of electron physics
27 November 2015 Sol88: The delusion that Earth's magnetotail is a comet jet with "entrained" dust.
If I thought that you were actually reading the science rather than writing kneejerk delusions then that would be a point of ignorance, not a delusion. But your track record says that is this case.
Last edited:
tusenfem
Illuminator
- Joined
- May 27, 2008
- Messages
- 3,306
Apparently Sol decided to make comments to my messages, I list them below, to only make one reply
This was a reply to me telling that the only the Lutetia data still have problems (for whatever reason), but that the rest of the publicly accessable data is available on PSA.
No idea still what the vinegar stroke is, but hey, who knows how sol's mind works. Apparently it is something sexual.
As I mainly work on MAG data, it seems to me rather clear how the current sheets tie in with the MAG data.
The two sheets were on the boundaries of oppositely directed solar wind magnetic field, draped around the comet. Of course this creates a current sheet.
The upper limit that I gave is rather strong, but I am doing a statistical study now on these kinds of structures to see how to interprete my results in a global view.
First a badly copypasta of a lab experiment on reconnection (for whatever reason), where it is said that the fields generated by the reconnection associated currents are studied.
I guess sol wants to tell us that reconnection is taking place near our favourite comet, which will not be appreciated by his EU friends, who abhorr magnetic reconnection.
Another quote from himself aksing "any hints on the MAG data to tie in with the above? "
and then asking how IR and UV radiation do something with no idea what is meant here
More less-coherent posts don't exist in this thread, I think, maybe sol was vinegar stroking when he wrote this bunch of replies?
Ehh, what to say here? "going to hold water"? I guess you should better go to the restroom and get rid of it.
What does the Earth's tail have to do with a quote about a cometary tail.
Even so, we never ever get into the cometary tail. Only in february next year will we most likely have a "tail excursion".
I guess sol was confused that he saw a 10^8 A total current and I only claimed 10 nA/m^2, not understanding the difference between current density and total current.
And no I am not bursting at the seams, I go to the restroom regularly.
So, yet another half-page full of sol nonsense.
This was a reply to me telling that the only the Lutetia data still have problems (for whatever reason), but that the rest of the publicly accessable data is available on PSA.
No idea still what the vinegar stroke is, but hey, who knows how sol's mind works. Apparently it is something sexual.
As I mainly work on MAG data, it seems to me rather clear how the current sheets tie in with the MAG data.
The two sheets were on the boundaries of oppositely directed solar wind magnetic field, draped around the comet. Of course this creates a current sheet.
The upper limit that I gave is rather strong, but I am doing a statistical study now on these kinds of structures to see how to interprete my results in a global view.
First a badly copypasta of a lab experiment on reconnection (for whatever reason), where it is said that the fields generated by the reconnection associated currents are studied.
I guess sol wants to tell us that reconnection is taking place near our favourite comet, which will not be appreciated by his EU friends, who abhorr magnetic reconnection.
Another quote from himself aksing "any hints on the MAG data to tie in with the above? "
and then asking how IR and UV radiation do something with no idea what is meant here
More less-coherent posts don't exist in this thread, I think, maybe sol was vinegar stroking when he wrote this bunch of replies?
@Tusenfem,
"A cometary current system including plasma tail streamers separated by a neutral current sheet, with a total current exceeding 10^8A,[7] "
Going to hold any water, remembering of course Earth's a fair bit bigger than a weakly active comet such 67P?
P.S
You must be bursting at the seams!
Oh well, just a few more weeks.
Ehh, what to say here? "going to hold water"? I guess you should better go to the restroom and get rid of it.
What does the Earth's tail have to do with a quote about a cometary tail.
Even so, we never ever get into the cometary tail. Only in february next year will we most likely have a "tail excursion".
I guess sol was confused that he saw a 10^8 A total current and I only claimed 10 nA/m^2, not understanding the difference between current density and total current.
And no I am not bursting at the seams, I go to the restroom regularly.
So, yet another half-page full of sol nonsense.
Yes, an interesting paper. A broad review of comets is long overdue
The double lobed shape of comet 67P seems to be tied to the outburst and location of the jets.
Electric Universe: Comet 67P emits flash of light ahead of perihelion
The double lobed shape is also found further out in the solar system in the unexpectedly energetic 4 outer moons of Ploto
Pluto 'Pandemonium' | Space News
More evidence for the Electric Comet Hypothesis
Last edited:
jonesdave116
Philosopher
- Joined
- Feb 26, 2015
- Messages
- 6,222
Where in any of that is there anything to do with EU rubbish? Which part of; outburst - neutral gas - almost total reduction in magnetic field strength - didn't you understand?
Nothing detected from electric woo. No massive increase in ionised gas - and it would be ionised by an electric discharge - so what, exactly, are we supposed to be looking at?
Don't forget, we've known for years that there is ice below the surface of comets, and it looks like MIRO has detected it at 67P.
Maybe you could list the evidence so far for the EU electric comet nonsense. Not the delusions - the actual evidence. I'll save you the time by listing it here:
You got that wrong
Here is some evidence
The Electric Comet II — Best Evidence
Evidence Confirms Electric Comet Model
The Electric Comet PDF
Yip, the old mainstream dirty snowball model of comets continues it's morphing into the Electric Comet hypothesis the more we see and hear of the papers published and especially recently for comet 67P
Better late than never eh?
jonesdave116
Philosopher
- Joined
- Feb 26, 2015
- Messages
- 6,222
You got that wrong
Here is some evidence
The Electric Comet II — Best Evidence
Evidence Confirms Electric Comet Model
The Electric Comet PDF
Yip, the old mainstream dirty snowball model of comets continues it's morphing into the Electric Comet hypothesis the more we see and hear of the papers published and especially recently for comet 67P
Better late than never eh?
Again, just more links to already long debunked pseudoscience. I asked for evidence, not delusion. Scientific evidence. Where is it? From the scientific literature. i.e. not made up fairy tales designed to fool the gullible.
tusenfem
Illuminator
- Joined
- May 27, 2008
- Messages
- 3,306
Yeah, well,
Maybe the peeps so sott (or sod) dot net should not run ahead with their conclusions and actually read Charlotte's paper on the cavity.
Ah, yes, the planet Ploto, well known to have a double lobe.
jonesdave116
Philosopher
- Joined
- Feb 26, 2015
- Messages
- 6,222
Yes indeedy. Funny how when they look at those jets it turns out that they are composed of dust and H2O vapour. Just like the jets from the neck of Hartley 2. Meanwhile, at the other end of Hartley 2, CO2 is outgassing like mad and entraining a shed load of water ice grains.
All sounds like irrefutable proof of electric woo to me. Not.
Where's the fun in that?
This Jet From Rosetta's Comet was so Strong it Disrupted the Solar Wind
The more they find out about comets the more they look like Electric Comets
Well, if you had been paying attention tusenfem you would know it's not Pluto. The video does point out it's Kerberos and Hydra as the double lobe moons. see HERE
Wonder what's powering that Pandemonium of the moons in the Plutonian system? Shouldn't they have ALL calmed down by now if they were really billions of years old? Maybe it's just recently been disturbed
Quite similar to 67P don't you think?
Similar process that shaped them too?
jonesdave116
Philosopher
- Joined
- Feb 26, 2015
- Messages
- 6,222
Quite similar to 67P don't you think?
Similar process that shaped them too?
Well, given that the "process" in the neck region of 67P is known to be from the sublimation of H2O, then no, it's nothing to do with it. Pluto is too far away for H2O sublimation, and nobody believes sublimation is the reason for the bi-lobed shape of 67P. If the process you refer to is collision, then maybe.
Don't forget; 15 months and not even the tiniest bit of electric woo seen on the surface of this ~500 kg/m^3 comet. Hell, we don't even see it on asteroids with elliptical orbits, which, according to the eejit Thornhill, comets are supposed to be!
EU; still an evidence-free zone.
- Status