Continuation The Electric Comet Theory Boogaloo (Part 2)

Status
Not open for further replies.
Sol88: The delusion that I am as deluded as the Thunderbolts cult with their insanity

Sol88 said:
So you concede then after 6 years, RC? ...
Click to expand...
14 April 2016 Sol88: The delusion that I am as deluded as the Thunderbolts cult or you with the insanity that comets are rocks because a crank wrote 60 years ago had a fantasy that Venus erupted from Jupiter, etc. :p!
I am not ignorant, gullible, brainwashed, stupid or deluded like the Thunderbolts cult followers, Sol88. I know the evidence that comets are made of ices and dust. I know that Wal Thornhill has been lying since 2005 about a flash before impact happening in the Deep Impact mission to Tempel 1.

10th November 2010 Tim Thompson: Pointed out that Haig repeated a lie a lie about a flash before The Deep Impact impact. No sign that Haig understands that he was lied to in the following 5 years :eek:!
14 April 2016 Sol88: Can you read better than Haig and understand that you have been lied to for at least the past 6 years?

14 April 2016 Sol88: A delusion that mainstream astrophysicists do not know how to apply electromagnetism.

14 April 2016 Sol88: A delusion that mainstream astrophysicists do not acknowledge the magnetic and the electric. One look at the literature will show a rational person that this is not the case.

14 April 2016 Sol88: Parrots the EU delusion of EM force > gravitational force means that EM effects are always greater than gravitational effects :jaw-dropp!
In your laughing dog format:
:dl: The ELECTROMAGNETIC force is stronger than the GRAVITATIONAL force.
:dl: The ELECTROMAGNETIC force can be shielded. The GRAVITATIONAL force cannot be shielded.
:dl: In general the universe is neutral. The ELECTROMAGNETIC force is generally shielded and effects are short range. The GRAVITATIONAL force has no known limits and effects are long range.
As an example: The EM effects in the interstellar medium (a plasma) have a scale of 10 meters. A volume of the ISM containing say 1 kg of matter will have an effect on atoms a light year away. A light year is 9,460,730,472,580,800 meters!
ETA: A more relevant example: The orbits of comets (and every other body in the Solar System and most spacecraft) obey the laws of gravitation as if there were no electromagnetic effects on them. We can predict the orbits of comets good enough to send spacecraft to where they will be years in advance while ignoring any EM effects.
 
Last edited:
W.T."Tom" Bridgman debunked 14 April 2016 Sol88: A delusion that mainstream astrophysicists do not acknowledge the magnetic and the electric. in his blog several years ago. While I look for it:
November 24, 2013 Electric Comets: Failures of the Electric Comet Model
Electric Comets II. Of Water & Ice
Electric Comets III: Mass vs. Charge
Electric Comets: More Failures of the Electric Comet Model

Electric Universe: Peer-Review Exercise 1
Article Reviewed:
Editorial: Some Initial Thoughts on Plasma Cosmology
by Jeremy Dunning-Davies

The claim that astronomers ignore plasmas and electric effects has been repeatedly documented as false (see 365 Days of Astronomy: The Electric Universe).
...
Just Some of the References Behind the Podcast
• S. Rosseland. Electrical state of a star. Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 84:720–728, June 1924.
• A. Pannekoek. Ionization in stellar atmospheres (Errata: 2 24). Bulletin of the Astronomical Institutes of the Netherlands, 1:107–118, July 1922.
...
• G. E. Hale and H. D. Babcock. An attempt to measure the free electricity in the sun’s atmosphere. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 1(3):123–127, March 1915.
• P. Foukal and S. Hinata. Electric fields in the solar atmosphere - A review. Solar Physics, 132:307–334, April 1991. doi: 10.1007/BF00152291.
Click to expand...
Sol88: What do you think the word electric means in many of those reference?

The Real Electric Universe: Inspired by Velikovsky? deals with an assertion by a guy called Haig that Velikovsky's crank book was read by astronomers that "Mainstream at that time denied Electromagnetism in Space or ANY need for it.".
 
Last edited:
Ahh, I see your error

In general the universe is neutral. The ELECTROMAGNETIC force is generally shielded and effects are short range. The GRAVITATIONAL force has no known limits and effects are long range.

and

Magnetic fields are frozen in.

along with PLASMA (and DUSTY PLASMA) being called GAS


"How embarrassment!" :o

Explains everything!!
 
Last edited:
Sol88: Deludingly reads the words "Magnetic fields are frozen in" in a previous post

Sol88 said:
Ahh, I see your error
Click to expand...
I see your delusions, Sol88.
15 April 2016 Sol88: Deludingly reads the words "Magnetic fields are frozen in" in one of my previous posts :jaw-dropp!
15 April 2016 Sol88: A delusion that an irrelevant, incoherent rant can show anyone an "error".

  1. 13 April 2016 Sol88: "Drinks the Kool-Aid" by parroting the deluded electric sun fantasy.
  2. 13 April 2016 Sol88: Still cannot understand that Wal Thornhill has been lying to Sol88 for many years (11 years to the general public) :eek:!
  3. 14 April 2016 Sol88: The abysmal ignorance of thinking that neutrino oscillations are just theory!
  4. 14 April 2016 Sol88: Plasma instabilities are electromagnetic, not your "electrical"
  5. 14 April 2016 Sol88: The delusion that I am as deluded as the Thunderbolts cult or you with the insanity that comets are rocks because a crank wrote 60 years ago had a fantasy that Venus erupted from Jupiter, etc.!
  6. 14 April 2016 Sol88: A delusion that mainstream astrophysicists do not know how to apply electromagnetism.
  7. 14 April 2016 Sol88: A delusion that mainstream astrophysicists do not acknowledge the magnetic and the electric. One look at the literature will show a rational person that this is not the case.
  8. 14 April 2016 Sol88: Parrots the EU delusion of EM force > gravitational force means that EM effects are always greater than gravitational effects !
The parroting of the Thunderbolt cult ignorance, delusions and lies in this thread alone (continuation of a thread that is now 6 years of delusions from Sol88 and Haig!) - added March 2016 lies and delusions.
10th April 2015: The ignorance, delusions and lies in the Thunderbolts web site, videos, etc. mostly cited by Haig.
294 days and counting of fear of doing basic 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 said:
Magnetic fields are frozen in.
Click to expand...
A bit of a derail but there are situations where the magnetic field in a plasma can be treated as if it was "frozen into" the plasma. The common example is the solar wind: Why is a magnetic field 'frozen into' the solar wind?
The solar wind comes from the Sun, and it is laced with lines of magnetic force caused by currents flowing near the surface of the sun, and in the interplanetary medium. It is 'frozen into' the wind, because when you look at the dynamics of this interplanetary plasma, there is about as much energy density ( pressure) in the gas component as there is in the magnetic field component, with the scales tipped in favor of the gas. This means that the gas drags the magnetic field around, and the magnetic field mostly follows after the gas as it flows out from the sun.
Click to expand...
The frozen in magnetic field assumption was first suggested by
Hannes Alfvén in 1942: Alfvén's Theorem
In most astrophysical environments, as well as laboratory plasmas, the electric conductivity is not infinite, so the magnetic field lines are not ideally frozen into the fluid. However, with a high electric conductivity, or equivalently a small resistivity, the frozen in theorem can be approximately applied. This is called the frozen flux approximation which is widely used in dynamo theory.
Click to expand...
It is ironic that a cult which basically treats Alfvén as a holy man hates his work so much :p!

This looks like Sol88 parroting the part of the Thunderbolts cult delusion about magnetic reconnection - a phenomena that is actually researched in labs here on Earth (their holy grail) and they deny exists!
 
Many of the comments of the obviously scientifically struggling, have already been addressed by Tusenfem here: http://blogs.esa.int/rosetta/2016/0...ic-field-free-bubble-at-comet/#comment-599586
If anybody bothers to follow that thread, it is obvious that when it comes to comets, Alfven was spouting nothing more than mainstream dogma. Shame on him. Pity these uneducated followers of Thornhill that diss Alfven in such a way, and choose to follow a complete retard. Still, there you go.
 
Reality Check said:
A bit of a derail but there are situations where the magnetic field in a plasma can be treated as if it was "frozen into" the plasma. The common example is the solar wind: Why is a magnetic field 'frozen into' the solar wind?

The frozen in magnetic field assumption was first suggested by
Hannes Alfvén in 1942: Alfvén's Theorem

It is ironic that a cult which basically treats Alfvén as a holy man hates his work so much :p!

This looks like Sol88 parroting the part of the Thunderbolts cult delusion about magnetic reconnection - a phenomena that is actually researched in labs here on Earth (their holy grail) and they deny exists!
Click to expand...

you forgot to quote this little pearler
In most astrophysical environments, as well as laboratory plasmas, the electric conductivity is not infinite, so the magnetic field lines are not ideally frozen into the fluid.
Click to expand...

Bolded and underlined for your benefit RC.

and

Just to see if you've got two brain cells to rub together, what are the implications if the magnetic field IS NOT frozen in, as stated in YOUR link???

I'll make a prediction....you don't know and will not answer a direct question and try to hide the fact with bluster and Bulldropings.

Give it a go ya mug :D
 
Last edited:
And your total and complete lack of any sort of critical thinking when faced with statements like those below.

Much of the universe's water is produced as a byproduct of star formation. The formation of stars is accompanied by a strong outward wind of gas and dust. When this outflow of material eventually impacts the surrounding gas, the shock waves that are created compress and heat the gas. The water observed is quickly produced in this warm dense gas.[17]
Click to expand...

Calling PLASMA a GAS and SHOCKWAVES as some sort of mechanical interaction when in fact it turtles(plasma physics) all the way down.
 
Still no word from the Rosetta team on "jets".

Holger Sierks must be shaking in his shoes.
 
Sol88: A lie by quote mining Alfvén's Theorem on Wikipedia

Sol88 said:
you forgot to quote this little pearler
Click to expand...
Such a small sentence to contain such big lies, Sol88 :p!
This is what I quoted from Alfvén's Theorem
In most astrophysical environments, as well as laboratory plasmas, the electric conductivity is not infinite, so the magnetic field lines are not ideally frozen into the fluid. However, with a high electric conductivity, or equivalently a small resistivity, the frozen in theorem can be approximately applied. This is called the frozen flux approximation which is widely used in dynamo theory.
Click to expand...
The bit in bold red is what you said I did not quote.
The other lie is a lie by quote mining - you did cut out the frozen flux approximation :jaw-dropp!
15 April 2016 Sol88: A lie by quote mining Alfvén's Theorem on Wikipedia.
 
Sol88: The delusion that everything in in space is plasma

Sol88 said:
And your total and complete lack of any sort of critical thinking when faced with statements like those below.
Click to expand...
A total and complete denial of any sort of knowledge of physics when faced with physics is astounding, Sol88. Everything in space is not PLASMA! Neutral GAS exists. So astronomers use the general term gas for all gas an plasma in space.
Molecular cloud
A molecular cloud, sometimes called a stellar nursery (if star formation is occurring within), is a type of interstellar cloud, the density and size of which permit the formation of molecules, most commonly molecular hydrogen (H2). This is in contrast to other areas of the interstellar medium that contain predominantly ionized gas.
Click to expand...

15 April 2016 Sol88: The delusion that everything in in space is plasma.

Water
Much of the universe's water is produced as a byproduct of star formation. The formation of stars is accompanied by a strong outward wind of gas and dust. When this outflow of material eventually impacts the surrounding gas, the shock waves that are created compress and heat the gas. The water observed is quickly produced in this warm dense gas.[17]

On 22 July 2011 a report described the discovery of a gigantic cloud of water vapor containing "140 trillion times more water than all of Earth's oceans combined" around a quasar located 12 billion light years from Earth. According to the researchers, the "discovery shows that water has been prevalent in the universe for nearly its entire existence".[18][19]

Water has been detected in interstellar clouds within our galaxy, the Milky Way.[citation needed] Water probably exists in abundance in other galaxies, too, because its components, hydrogen and oxygen, are among the most abundant elements in the universe. Based on models of the formation and evolution of the Solar System and that of other star systems, most other planetary systems are likely to have similar ingredients.
Click to expand...
Reference 17 is Discover of Water Vapor Near Orion Nebula Suggests Possible Origin of H20 in Solar System (1998)
"For reasons that aren't entirely understood, when stars are born, their birth is accompanied by a strong outward wind of gas and dust. When this outflowing material eventually impacts the surrounding gas, the shock waves that are created compress and heat the gas. The water we observe is rapidly produced in this warm dense gas."
...
"An enhanced concentration of water is precisely what we expected in this gas cloud," said Melnick "We are looking at a region of interstellar space where shock waves have made the gas abnormally warm. For the past 25 years, astrophysicists have been predicting that whenever the temperature exceeds about 200 degrees Fahrenheit, chemical reactions will convert most of the oxygen atoms in the interstellar gas into water. And that's exactly what we've observed in Orion."

Melnick also noted that the strength of the water radiation detected from Orion was in perfect agreement with theoretical predictions.
Click to expand...
And what is the Orion Nebula, Sol88?
The entirety of the Orion Nebula extends across a 1° region of the sky, and includes neutral clouds of gas and dust, associations of stars, ionized volumes of gas, and reflection nebulae.
Click to expand...
(my emphasis added)
The paper is Thermal Water Vapor Emission from Shocked Regions in Orion
Using the Long Wavelength Spectrometer on board the Infrared Space Observatory, we have observed thermal water vapor emission from a roughly circular field of view approximately 75" in diameter centered on the Orion BN-KL region. The Fabry-Perot line strengths, line widths, and spectral line shifts observed in eight transitions between 71 and 125 mum show good agreement with models of thermal emission arising from a molecular cloud subjected to a magnetohydrodynamic C-type shock. Both the breadth and the relative strengths of the observed lines argue for emission from a shock rather than from warm quiescent gas in the Orion core. Although one of the eight transitions appears anomalously strong and may be subject to the effects of radiative pumping, the other seven indicate an H2O/H2 abundance ratio on the order of 5×10-4 and a corresponding gas-phase oxygen-to-hydrogen abundance ratio on the order of 4×10-4. Given current estimates of the interstellar, gas-phase, oxygen and carbon abundances in the solar vicinity, this value is consistent with theoretical shock models that predict the conversion into water of all the gas-phase oxygen that is not bound as CO. The overall cooling provided by rotational transitions of H2O in this region appears to be comparable to the cooling through rotational lines of CO but is an order of magnitude lower than cooling through H2 emission. However, the model that best fits our observations shows cooling by H2O and CO dominant in that portion of the postshock region where temperatures are below ~800 K and neither vibrational nor rotational radiative cooling by H2 is appreciable.
Click to expand...
WARM QUIESCENT GAS so expect a rant from Sol88 where he ignores the preceding sentence :D. The paper first states the evidence that the emissions come from a molecular cloud, i.e. predominantly neutral gas rather than plasma.
 
Last edited:
Sol88: A "Still no word from the Rosetta team on "jets" lie

Sol88 said:
Still no word from the Rosetta team on "jets".
Click to expand...
Two lies again in a small sentence, Sol88 :p!
The minor one is that comets have real jets (no scare quotes).
The major one is the lie about the Rosetta team not reporting on jets. There are many papers from the Rosetta team on the jets of 69P including a couple tracing them to their sources.
15 April 2015 Sol88: A "Still no word from the Rosetta team on "jets" lie

ETA: This may be a previous irrational demand from Sol88 for animated gifs of jets?
 
Last edited:
There has been 'word' on the jets. Matt Taylor joined in the conversation in one of the threads on the Rosetta blog. According to him, ALL jets are lit only by sunlight reflected from dust. No exceptions. No anomalous temperatures. No anomalous ionisation.
http://blogs.esa.int/rosetta/2016/03/04/cometwatch-1-march/#comment-599558

No doubt, just like Hartley 2, the jets will be cool, neutral gas. Whether they will see entrained ice within them is another matter. The jets at Hartley 2 were long lasting, and could therefore be investigated. The most spectacular ones at 67P were short lived. As it is impossible to predict when and where they will occur, it is difficult to get measurements of them. Psychic Sally isn't on the team, as far as I know. All one can do is measure the increase in gas in the coma (if any) after the event. I did read of one outburst which was followed by an increase in CO. And the 29 July outburst was reported on the Rosetta blog, with a whole range of gases being measured as having increased. Not much, if any, additional H2O though. So it seems the more spectacular outbursts may be driven by super-volatiles (my inference). The southern hemisphere also seems to be relatively rich in CO2, with patches of it found on the surface.
There was also a MIRO paper from earlier in the mission, in which surface temperatures were measured contemporaneously with outgassing. Nothing anomalous. The gas temperatures were also very low.
http://www.aanda.org/articles/aa/pdf/2015/11/aa26094-15.pdf

And now it appears that the comet was 'changing colour' as sublimation progressed, due to the dust layer being removed, and icier material being exposed.
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0019103516001342

In fact, some time ago, the spectral slope of the comet nucleus was used to predict which areas might actually become active. It seems they were quite successful.
http://www.aanda.org/articles/aa/abs/2016/02/aa27369-15/aa27369-15.html (paywalled)

As for the frozen-in concept, Tusenfem has already addressed that in the post I linked to on the Rosetta blog. Evidently it is quite difficult to find a way of breaking it down. And the IMF has been shown to be 'stopped', or 'hung up', in 3 situations that I can think of, where the 'object' had no magnetic field of its own; at Venus; in the 4 AMPTE artificial comet experiments; and also at real comets (67P and Halley). So it works perfectly well in those situations, and Alfven had no problem with that himself.
 
tusenfem said:
For those interested in real science, instead of Sol88's trolling rantings: next week Thursday there is the Rosetta session at the EGU general assembly in Vienna
Orals:http://meetingorganizer.copernicus.org/EGU2016/orals/20383
Posters: http://meetingorganizer.copernicus.org/EGU2016/posters/20383
Click to expand...

Yes, I downloaded a handful of the abstracts from there a while back. Just had another look through them. It seems answers to Sol's electric jets should soon be at hand: http://meetingorganizer.copernicus.org/EGU2016/EGU2016-5395.pdf
"Investigating the surface brightness profiles, ejected mass and speed from
the outburst events of comet 67P/Churyumov-Gerasmenko."

Hopefully the event is closely followed and reported on Twitter, as was the ESLAB meeting on the MUPUS twitter thingy.
 
tusenfem said:
For those interested in real science, instead of Sol88's trolling rantings: next week Thursday there is the Rosetta session at the EGU general assembly in Vienna
Orals:http://meetingorganizer.copernicus.org/EGU2016/orals/20383
Posters: http://meetingorganizer.copernicus.org/EGU2016/posters/20383
Click to expand...

OOOHHHH! Just read this one: http://meetingorganizer.copernicus.org/EGU2016/EGU2016-2214.pdf
"Four-fluid MHD Simulations of the Plasma and Neutral Gas Environment
of Comet 67P/Churyumov-Gerasimenko Near Perihelion"

"....we showed that the plasma environment in the inner coma region have some new features: magnetic reconnection in the tail region, a magnetic pile-up region on the nightside, and nucleus directed plasma flow inside the nightside reconnection region."

Magnetic field pile-up AND magnetic reconnection! That loon on the Rosetta blog is going to be frothing at the mouth!
 
jonesdave116 said:
OOOHHHH! Just read this one: http://meetingorganizer.copernicus.org/EGU2016/EGU2016-2214.pdf
"Four-fluid MHD Simulations of the Plasma and Neutral Gas Environment
of Comet 67P/Churyumov-Gerasimenko Near Perihelion"

"....we showed that the plasma environment in the inner coma region have some new features: magnetic reconnection in the tail region, a magnetic pile-up region on the nightside, and nucleus directed plasma flow inside the nightside reconnection region."

Magnetic field pile-up AND magnetic reconnection! That loon on the Rosetta blog is going to be frothing at the mouth!
Click to expand...

Yes, MRX is expected, and seen in comet 2P/Enke, who lost his tail.
Too bad the "tail" excursion was only 1000 km, way too near to see actual MRX, but maybe there are some remote signatures in the particles and fields.
 
Although the ExB drift does not make charge separation when the scale size
is larger than the ion gyroradius, ions and electrons move in the opposite direction to each other within the short distance up to a gyroradius, and therefore, the charge separation occurs
Click to expand...

Job done!
 
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