Yah JD116, charge differential!!!
follow the dominoes.
v
What about the "charge differential", what do you mean, what are you implying here? The difference between positive sunlit and negative dark side, the total charge, the non-existing solar electric field, what is it Sol?
As for any discharges, even in the broadest terms of what an electrical discharge is, why don't we ask Tusenfem and the RPC cabal??
There are no discharges, if there would the they would be measured, which they are not. Discharges give off a very specific signature. So, why don't YOU show what you mean with discharges.
Oh, wait ... we now have to take the "broadest of terms" whatever that means.
plasma waves? Beam like particle showers, plasma "boundaries", "Singing" comet....
Plasma waves are not discharges, plasma boundaries are not discharges, singing comet is not a discharge, beam like particle showers are not discharges. Unless you can come up with some real theory, your word salat does not make any sense (as usual), and in the end you are only writing up this nonsense, because you like to irritate people, knowing full well that mainstream has to reply to your childish complaints in order for science not to enter into a post-truth era.
Because that's all there is for the electric comet, it is completely "post-truth" (interestingly already before this term was invented). It is all unbased on any fact or physics, there is only "we have this idea" and "we feel like it should be like this" and if the actual data do not show this, we will just make our own interpretation about what is written.
This last point was clear when Sol was conveniently misreading about the collimated jets coming out of the comet and merging (which is a hydrodynamic phenomenon, and yes you will have to learn some physics for that), which were superimposed on a general background dust. Quote from JD's post: "The three-dimensional dust tracing analysis shows that photographed jets are often a conjunction of multiple aligned jet structures on top of a non-collimated, homogeneously released dust background."
Or looking at the image that Sol posted from part of Tom's paper (by the way, here is the correct link:
http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2015P&SS..119...24N , although looking at it it does not seem to be that paper, okay I found it, it is Mendis et al. 1981:
http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1981ApJ...249..787M), which states that for large distances d > 5 AU (i.e. outside of Jupiter's orbit) the cometary ions are negligible. Indeed they are, because a century of experience has shown us that comets start to become active only after they cross Jupiter's orbit, as then the solar irradiation is getting strong enough to let ices evaporate. But of course the solar wind, which has then free access to the surface of the comet has both positive and negative particles. There will be a little implantation of these, but mostly there will be sputtering. This means that particles will be knocked off, which can be ions and electrons. The solar UV will kick out electrons from the surface, which can stick to the dark side of the comet. Interestingly, but not surprisingly, Sol left out the (3 pages of) calculations ...
It is oh so easy to make up fantastic beast and to think you know where to find them, but it takes time and effort to become Newt Scamander.
!
!
:
.gif "What was that? :wwt")
