Continuation The Electric Comet Theory Boogaloo (Part 2)

Status
Not open for further replies.
jonesdave116 said:
No. The Sun doesn't have an 'electric field'. We'd have noticed it by now if it did. Perhaps you are getting confused with the magnetic field. You will notice, if you bother to look, that the phenomena seen in the comae of comets were predicted and modelled long before we sent any spacecraft to measure them (Tusenfem can probably give a long list of references, which will include Alfven). You will also notice that none of those predictions or models took into account any EU ideas.
Click to expand...

from Tusenfem
ETA: and actually, because the interplanetary magnetic field is in a Parker spiral, the heliospheric current sheet actually has a small radial component, but don't tell it any futher.
Click to expand...

So who's right??? http://solarphysics.livingreviews.org/Articles/lrsp-2013-5/articlese2.html

'cos if the Sun has a radial electric field.... http://electric-cosmos.org/sun.htm
 
Last edited:
tusenfem said:
If I would have thought there would be a DL, don't you think I would have written that in the paper?



No not at all, if you actually would look at the power spectrum, there is very little noise.



Sheesh man! stop with the double layers nonsense!
Nested draping has absolutely NOTHING to do with the creation of double layers.



Because the solar wind behaves like that, sometimes the density increases, sometimes the field increases, whatever.



sigh
Click to expand...

Double layer formation mechanisms
The Moon. The prediction of a lunar double layer[8] was confirmed in 2003.[9] In the shadows, the Moon charges negatively in the interplanetary medium.[10]

The details of the formation mechanism depend on the environment of the plasma (e.g. double layers in the laboratory, ionosphere, solar wind, fusion, etc.). Proposed mechanisms for their formation have included:

1971: Between plasmas of different temperatures[11]
1976: In laboratory plasmas[12]
1982: Disruption of a neutral current sheet[13]
1983: Injection of non-neutral electron current into a cold plasma[14]
1985: Increasing the current density in a plasma[15]
1986: In the accretion column of a neutron star[16]
1986: By pinches in cosmic plasma regions[17]
1987: In a plasma constrained by a magnetic mirror[18]
1988: By an electrical discharge[19]
1988: Current-driven instabilities (strong double layers)[20]
1988: Spacecraft-ejected electron beams[21]
1989: From shock waves in a plasma[22]
2000: Laser radiation[23]
2002: When magnetic field-aligned currents encounter density cavities[24]
2003: By the incidence of plasma on the dark side of the Moon's surface[25]
Click to expand...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Double_layer_(plasma)

just for sh*** and giggles, what is the difference between the Moons double layer
. The prediction of a lunar double layer[8] was confirmed in 2003.[9] In the shadows, the Moon charges negatively in the interplanetary medium.[10]
Click to expand...
and comet 67P with its shadowed regions?

I think your wrong but still, you are the expert Tusenfem!!

So for clarification from the expert, does the Sun have a radial electric field, Tusenfem?
 
Last edited:
Sol88 said:
from Tusenfem

So who's right??? http://solarphysics.livingreviews.org/Articles/lrsp-2013-5/articlese2.html

'cos if the Sun has a radial electric field.... http://electric-cosmos.org/sun.htm
Click to expand...

The heliosphere has a Parker spiral magnetic field and has oppositely directed magnetic field in both hemispheres.
These (solar) magnetic field create (just like in the current sheets discussed above) a current sheet, the heliospheric current sheet.
As this current must flow perpendicular to the magnetic field lines, and as the magnetic field lines are in a Parker spiral, there is a slight radial component in the heliospheric current sheet.
However, this current is NOT driven by an electric field, but by the oppositely directed magnetic fields in both heliospheric hemispheres, through Maxwell-Ampère's law.
Not all currents are driven by electric fields, that is something you should know by now. If they were, then induction cooking plates in your kitchen would be highly dangerous, if they would involve electric fields.
And NO, the Sun does NOT have a radial electric field.
 
Last edited:
Sol88 said:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Double_layer_(plasma)

just for sh*** and giggles, what is the difference between the Moons double layer and comet 67P with its shadowed regions?

I think your wrong but still, you are the expert Tusenfem!!

So for clarification from the expert, does the Sun have a radial electric field, Tusenfem?
Click to expand...

The double layers on the moon are "small", a scale height of 1-2 km, and the moon is not hampered by all the stuff going on around a comet.
But even if the comet would do the same, then we still would not measure it because the spacecraft is too far from the nucleus.

And as usual you are not understanding what I am writing. I write about draped magnetic fields, oppositely directed, and the associated induced current sheets at a distance of 180 km from the nucleus. Nothing of this all has to do with a possible double layer that may or may not exist on the surface the comet.

We know it can have surface charge (of either + or -), from the paper by Tom Nordheim, which was calculated for an inactive comet far away from the Sun. So, small double layers, if you want to call them that, could be created. However, at an active comet, close to the Sun, the situation will be much different.
 
tusenfem said:
The double layers on the moon are "small", a scale height of 1-2 km, and the moon is not hampered by all the stuff going on around a comet.
But even if the comet would do the same, then we still would not measure it because the spacecraft is too far from the nucleus.

And as usual you are not understanding what I am writing. I write about draped magnetic fields, oppositely directed, and the associated induced current sheets at a distance of 180 km from the nucleus. Nothing of this all has to do with a possible double layer that may or may not exist on the surface the comet.

We know it can have surface charge (of either + or -), from the paper by Tom Nordheim, which was calculated for an inactive comet far away from the Sun. So, small double layers, if you want to call them that, could be created. However, at an active comet, close to the Sun, the situation will be much different.
Click to expand...

Don't 'spose you'd have a diagram of nested draped magnetic fields?

I understand what you write about draped magnetic fields, oppositely directed, and the associated induced current sheets at a distance of 180 km from the nucleus...and that wouldn't make the diamagnetic cavity? Instead you are going to tell me neutral "ice" outgassing stops the solar wind???

Why?
 
Sol88 said:
Don't 'spose you'd have a diagram of nested draped magnetic fields?
Click to expand...

You could just follow the citation in the paper to Raeder et al. (1987), but I attach the figure. mmm can't, well it's Figure 3, the paper is open access.

Sol88 said:
I understand what you write about draped magnetic fields, oppositely directed, and the associated induced current sheets at a distance of 180 km from the nucleus...and that wouldn't make the diamagnetic cavity?
Click to expand...

If I measure such strong magnetic fields, then apparently I am not in the diamagnetic cavity. No idea what you want with this statement.

Sol88 said:
Instead you are going to tell me neutral "ice" outgassing stops the solar wind???

Why?
Click to expand...

That has been explained to you, just search this thread.
And apart from that, that has nothing to do with the topic that we are discussing.
 
tusenfem said:
You could just follow the citation in the paper to Raeder et al. (1987), but I attach the figure. mmm can't, well it's Figure 3, the paper is open access.



If I measure such strong magnetic fields, then apparently I am not in the diamagnetic cavity. No idea what you want with this statement.



That has been explained to you, just search this thread.
And apart from that, that has nothing to do with the topic that we are discussing.
Click to expand...

Ahhh...that's better http://slideplayer.com/slide/5012324/

That's pretty much what your saying, yeah?
 
tusenfem said:
The double layers on the moon are "small", a scale height of 1-2 km, and the moon is not hampered by all the stuff going on around a comet.
But even if the comet would do the same, then we still would not measure it because the spacecraft is too far from the nucleus.

And as usual you are not understanding what I am writing. I write about draped magnetic fields, oppositely directed, and the associated induced current sheets at a distance of 180 km from the nucleus. Nothing of this all has to do with a possible double layer that may or may not exist on the surface the comet.

We know it can have surface charge (of either + or -), from the paper by Tom Nordheim, which was calculated for an inactive comet far away from the Sun. So, small double layers, if you want to call them that, could be created. However, at an active comet, close to the Sun, the situation will be much different.
Click to expand...

Well that changes things! :cool:

However, at an active comet, close to the Sun, the situation will be much different.
Click to expand...
Because of the diamagnetic cavity?
 
tusenfem said:
??????????????????????????????????????????????????????????
Click to expand...


Sorry my confusion

We know it can have surface charge (of either + or -), from the paper by Tom Nordheim, which was calculated for an inactive comet far away from the Sun. So, small double layers, if you want to call them that, could be created.
Click to expand...

Yeah, we know, on the MOON...but


Surface charging and electrostatic dust acceleration at the nucleus of comet 67P during periods of low activity

So.....:confused:

Why I'm I confused??
 
Sol88 said:
Sorry my confusion



Yeah, we know, on the MOON...but


Surface charging and electrostatic dust acceleration at the nucleus of comet 67P during periods of low activity

So.....:confused:

Why I'm I confused??
Click to expand...

I don't know why you are confused, maybe because you keep on mixing up topics. There are two unrelated discussions here:

  1. Draped magnetic fields, oppositely directed, are separated by a current sheet;
  2. Possibility of "double layers" on the comet

The twain should not be mixed.

And please note that I put "double layers" in quotes, because they are not the usual plasma physics double layers as "invented" by Hannes Alfvén. They are, actually, electrostatic fields, where charged is embedded in the surface of the moon/comet, and the surrounding plasma will respond to it, as a Debye sheath, where the plasma wants to shield off the excess of charge through the motion of the mobile electrons and ions.

I would have to look at the paper about the moon to see what characteristics these "double layers" have, but in a normal plasma they do not have a "scale height".
 
tusenfem said:
I don't know why you are confused, maybe because you keep on mixing up topics. There are two unrelated discussions here:

  1. Draped magnetic fields, oppositely directed, are separated by a current sheet;
  2. Possibility of "double layers" on the comet

The twain should not be mixed.

And please note that I put "double layers" in quotes, because they are not the usual plasma physics double layers as "invented" by Hannes Alfvén. They are, actually, electrostatic fields, where charged is embedded in the surface of the moon/comet, and the surrounding plasma will respond to it, as a Debye sheath, where the plasma wants to shield off the excess of charge through the motion of the mobile electrons and ions.

I would have to look at the paper about the moon to see what characteristics these "double layers" have, but in a normal plasma they do not have a "scale height".
Click to expand...

Which is a fairly good summary of...
A comet is a negatively charged object moving through the extensive and constant radial electric field of the positively charged Sun (see below). A comet becomes negatively charged during its long sojourn in the outer solar system. As it speeds into the inner solar system, the increasing voltage and charge density of the plasma (solar “wind”) cause the comet to discharge electrically, producing the bright coma and tails.
Click to expand...

So the difference is...:rolleyes:
 
tusenfem said:
The double layers on the moon are "small", a scale height of 1-2 km, and the moon is not hampered by all the stuff going on around a comet.
But even if the comet would do the same, then we still would not measure it because the spacecraft is too far from the nucleus.

SNIP..

.
Click to expand...

Fortunately, the momentum was still large enough to right the lander up onto its legs again and eventually into its final resting position at Abydos at 17:31 UT. The magnetometer team also reconstructed the backward loop between the second and third touchdowns, along with the final attitude at its resting place, in front of the landscape seen in the CIVA images.
Click to expand...
LINK

Philae would have noticed them (cometary electrostatic "double layers") if it had not failed in it's primary objective!

Pity :(
 
Last edited:
tusenfem said:
I don't know why you are confused, maybe because you keep on mixing up topics. There are two unrelated discussions here:

  1. Draped magnetic fields, oppositely directed, are separated by a current sheet;
  2. Possibility of "double layers" on the comet

The twain should not be mixed.

And please note that I put "double layers" in quotes, because they are not the usual plasma physics double layers as "invented" by Hannes Alfvén. They are, actually, electrostatic fields, where charged is embedded in the surface of the moon/comet, and the surrounding plasma will respond to it, as a Debye sheath, where the plasma wants to shield off the excess of charge through the motion of the mobile electrons and ions.

I would have to look at the paper about the moon to see what characteristics these "double layers" have, but in a normal plasma they do not have a "scale height".
Click to expand...

Ok lets just stick with possible double layers on the surface of a comet...

Double layers may be classified in the following ways:

Weak and strong double layers. The strength of a double layer is expressed as the ratio of the potential drop in comparison with the plasma's equivalent thermal energy, or in comparison with the rest mass energy of the electrons. A double layer is said to be strong if the potential drop across the layer is greater than the equivalent thermal energy of the plasma's components. This means that for strong double layers there are four different components to the plasma:

The electrons entering at the low potential side of the double layer which are accelerated;
The ions entering at the high potential side of the double layer which are accelerated;
The electrons entering at the high potential side of the double layer which are decelerated and successively reflected; and
The ions which enter the double layer at the low potential side of the double layer which are decelerated and reflected.

Note that in the case of a weak double layer, the electrons and ions entering from the "wrong" side are decelerated by the electric field, however most will not be reflected, as the potential drop is not strong enough
Click to expand...
LINK

So far no "new" physics...

We have also investigated the possibility of dust acceleration and ejection above the nucleus due to electrostatic forces. Finally, we discuss these modeling results in the context of possible observations by instruments on both t he Rosetta orbiter and the Philae lande
Click to expand...
LINK

:blush:


but...scrap that idea because we KNOW comets are made of. They are just ice's and dust gently sublimating in the warmth of the sun :rolleyes:

and just out of curiosity, "ice's" in a comet being what the standard model expects, are a mixture of all the "volatiles" discovered so far including nitrogen and oxygen in some sort of blended mixture, right?

Like this Making a Comet in the Classroom?? but instead off using just "CO2" we need to mix in ALL the "ices"??
 
Last edited:
Sol88 said:
So the difference is...:rolleyes:
Click to expand...

The difference is that there is no electric woo impinging on the surface of the comet. It would be very noticeable.
There is no observed radial electric field from the Sun. That would also be noticed. Just the solar wind, which is quasi-neutral.
No electric woo is needed, as ice has been seen/ detected subsurface and on the surface (also now at Khepry and Anhur according to the ESLAB abstracts), and its sublimation products are seen in the coma at temperatures one would expect from sublimation. So all we need for sublimation is for the temperature to be sufficient for it to happen. Let me check........yep.
The solar wind has been missing since April until quite recently, and therefore cannot be invoked for any woo processes.
The diamagnetic cavity is just that. Electric discharges would create noticeable magnetic fields. As it happens, Philae found the comet to be remarkably non-magnetic.
And you are still quoting the paper about electrostatic forces, which are irrelevant when the solar wind is not even reaching the surface. The same applies to anything else that relies on the solar wind.

You've got ice, and you've got sunlight. Work it out. It's not rocket science.
 
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