ISF Logo   IS Forum
Forum Index Register Members List Events Mark Forums Read Help

Go Back   International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » Science, Mathematics, Medicine, and Technology
 


Welcome to the International Skeptics Forum, where we discuss skepticism, critical thinking, the paranormal and science in a friendly but lively way. You are currently viewing the forum as a guest, which means you are missing out on discussing matters that are of interest to you. Please consider registering so you can gain full use of the forum features and interact with other Members. Registration is simple, fast and free! Click here to register today.
Closed Thread
Old 19th June 2019, 06:26 PM   #4161
Sol88
Philosopher
 
Sol88's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 5,044
Originally Posted by jonesdave116 View Post
How many times? Can you not read? Are you completely ignorant of all things scientific? Which way is the putative ambipolar field pointing? Will that accelerate negatively charged anything away from the comet? Really, how many times is it going to have to be pointed out to you before you understand? Seriously, I could have explained this to a 12 year old, just once, and the twelve year old would have got it. Why can't you? Never studied science, have you? Or maths. Or much of anything, as far as I can see.
Electrostatics, lol. You're still thinking pith balls, sport, this is obvious out of your league.

You should really learn about plasma and electrodynamics.

What's your take on ALICE and the detection that 67P is IMMERSED in a charged nano dust environment?

All you can see is shinny ice! hilarious!

Beginner.
__________________
“No rock. Any charge separation is limited. The electric field is pointing in the wrong direction. Currents are doing nothing.” Jonesdave116.

“The 'electric comet' is physically IMPOSSIBLE to model using mainstream science! PERIOD! True story! End of story!” Indagator

Last edited by Sol88; 19th June 2019 at 06:29 PM.
Sol88 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 19th June 2019, 06:51 PM   #4162
Reality Check
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: New Zealand
Posts: 26,238
Thumbs down The usual lies, delusions, insults, etc. already addressed over the last 10 years

Originally Posted by Sol88 View Post
...
The usual insane lies, delusions, insults, etc. already addressed over the last 10 years.

Sol88's usual insanity, e.g. persistent insane insults of astronomers.
Reality Check is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 19th June 2019, 06:52 PM   #4163
Reality Check
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: New Zealand
Posts: 26,238
Thumbs down The usual lies, delusions, insults, etc. already addressed over the last 10 years

Originally Posted by Sol88 View Post
...
The usual insane lies, delusions, insults, etc. already addressed over the last 10 years
Reality Check is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 19th June 2019, 06:54 PM   #4164
Reality Check
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: New Zealand
Posts: 26,238
Thumbs down The usual lies, delusions, insults, etc. already addressed over the last 10 years

Originally Posted by Sol88 View Post
...
The usual insane lies, delusions, insults, etc. already addressed over the last 10 years.

Sol88's usual lies about posts.
jonesdave116 wrote about Sol88's over 10 years old ignorance of physics and even English!.

Sol88's usual insults of posters.
We have been explaining plasma and electrodynamics to Sol88 for many years and he has remained abysmally ignorant about plasma and electrodynamics. Not unexpected since Sol88's demented cult prophets are just as ignorant about plasma and electrodynamics.

Sol88's usual insane lies about science.
Astronomers have no problems with comets being surrounded by charged dust and ice grains. Comets eject dust and ice grains. Interaction with sunlight and the solar wind charges them.
That is textbook, many decades old physics that Sol88's demented cult has not learned yet.

A Sol88 insane lie about posters. No poster here is only seeing ice. Comets are made of both ices and dust as repeated thousands of times over the last 10 years.

Last edited by Reality Check; 19th June 2019 at 07:11 PM.
Reality Check is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 19th June 2019, 07:57 PM   #4165
Sol88
Philosopher
 
Sol88's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 5,044
Originally Posted by Reality Check View Post
The usual insane lies, delusions, insults, etc. already addressed over the last 10 years.

Sol88's usual insanity, e.g. persistent insane insults of astronomers.
This is the INSULT to the preeminent astronomer wrt the field of cometary science.

full quote.

Quote:
(c) What are comets made of?

At the simplest level, a very basic question is whether comets are mostly ice or mostly rock/dirt/refractory material. Whipple’s [2] model of the dirty snowball, the first quantitative model, envisioned cometary nuclei as mostly ice, although our understanding has been evolving more toward mostly rock, particularly for 67P/C-G for which refractory/volatile ratios as high as 6 have been cited [3,4].

Nevertheless, there is still considerable uncertainty about even this basic parameter, not least of which is that most measurements are subject to selection effects in removing refractories from the nucleus to the coma, where they are observed as dust.

With improvements in remote sensing over the last decade and particularly the wealth of measurements from Rosetta, we are making large strides in answering the question of which volatiles (ices) are near the surface of cometary nuclei, and the Deep Impact experiment implies that the near-surface volatiles are representative of the deeper interior [5,6].

The indications are that there is a large dispersion in relative abundances with only very limited correlations between relative abundances and any other parameters. On the other hand, we know very little about the abundance of the many possible refractory species.

As noted above, there were great advances from the Stardust mission, particularly the clear demonstration that cometary silicate grains had been transported from near the Sun to the region of cometary formation, but the selection effects in collecting the returned samples make it almost impossible to say much quantitatively about the bulk abundances of refractories [7].
Do you mean this insult?
Quote:
our understanding has been evolving more toward mostly rock
Good luck.
__________________
“No rock. Any charge separation is limited. The electric field is pointing in the wrong direction. Currents are doing nothing.” Jonesdave116.

“The 'electric comet' is physically IMPOSSIBLE to model using mainstream science! PERIOD! True story! End of story!” Indagator
Sol88 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 19th June 2019, 08:01 PM   #4166
Sol88
Philosopher
 
Sol88's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 5,044
Originally Posted by Reality Check View Post
The usual insane lies, delusions, insults, etc. already addressed over the last 10 years.


Sol88's usual insults of posters.
We have been explaining plasma and electrodynamics to Sol88 for many years and he has remained abysmally ignorant about plasma and electrodynamics. Not unexpected since Sol88's demented cult prophets are just as ignorant about plasma and electrodynamics.

Sol88's usual insane lies about science.
Astronomers have no problems with comets being surrounded by charged dust and ice grains. Comets eject dust and ice grains. Interaction with sunlight and the solar wind charges them.
That is textbook, many decades old physics that Sol88's demented cult has not learned yet.

A Sol88 insane lie about posters. No poster here is only seeing ice. Comets are made of both ices and dust as repeated thousands of times over the last 10 years.
Then explain the electrical circuit the comet operates in, using electrodynamics.

IT IS NOT IN THE STANDARD MODEL, AT ALL.


Quote:
Comets are made of both ices and dust
that's what was the first quantitative model, we have evolved since that time to...
Quote:
our understanding has been evolving more toward mostly rock


Ice....good one!
__________________
“No rock. Any charge separation is limited. The electric field is pointing in the wrong direction. Currents are doing nothing.” Jonesdave116.

“The 'electric comet' is physically IMPOSSIBLE to model using mainstream science! PERIOD! True story! End of story!” Indagator
Sol88 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 19th June 2019, 09:09 PM   #4167
Reality Check
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: New Zealand
Posts: 26,238
Thumbs down The insane insults of the deceased Michael Francis A'Hearn

Originally Posted by Sol88 View Post
...
The usual insane lies, delusions, insults, etc. already addressed over the last 10 years.

This was Michael Francis A'Hearn, a deceased expert on comets.

Sol88 knows that A'Hearn is dead, cannot defend himself and so spews insane insults linking A'Hearn to the demented thunderbolts cult's dogma of comets of actual rock.
Sol88 knows that A'Hearn wrote hundreds of papesr on comets made of ices and dust.
Sol88 knows that astronomers use terrestrial terms to describe cometary features. This is Sol88's insanity of denying that context exists. When talking about comets, "rock", "bedrock",'boulder", "cliff", "fissure", "pit" are objects made of ices and dust.

Sol88's first insane insult is linking Michael Francis A'Hearn to Sol88's demented thunderbolts cult's dogma of comets of actual rock.

Sol88's second insane insult is linking Michael Francis A'Hearn to Sol88's total delusion of "special comet rock"

Now Sol88 adds the insane insult that Michael Francis A'Hearn wrote lies .

"Refractories" do not magically become dust just because they are removed from the surface of a comet. "Refractories" are not rock - they are anything that is not ices. "Refractories" are the dust in the ices and dust comets in the hundreds of paper that A'Hearn wrote!
Quote:
(c) What are comets made of?

At the simplest level, a very basic question is whether comets are mostly ice or mostly rock/dirt/refractory material. Whipple’s [2] model of the dirty snowball, the first quantitative model, envisioned cometary nuclei as mostly ice, although our understanding has been evolving more toward mostly rock, particularly for 67P/C-G for which refractory/volatile ratios as high as 6 have been cited [3,4].

Nevertheless, there is still considerable uncertainty about even this basic parameter, not least of which is that most measurements are subject to selection effects in removing refractories from the nucleus to the coma, where they are observed as dust.

With improvements in remote sensing over the last decade and particularly the wealth of measurements from Rosetta, we are making large strides in answering the question of which volatiles (ices) are near the surface of cometary nuclei, and the Deep Impact experiment implies that the near-surface volatiles are representative of the deeper interior [5,6].

The indications are that there is a large dispersion in relative abundances with only very limited correlations between relative abundances and any other parameters. On the other hand, we know very little about the abundance of the many possible refractory species.

As noted above, there were great advances from the Stardust mission, particularly the clear demonstration that cometary silicate grains had been transported from near the Sun to the region of cometary formation, but the selection effects in collecting the returned samples make it almost impossible to say much quantitatively about the bulk abundances of refractories [7].
A'hearn is stating the detected dust in the coma is not-volatile material ("refractories") removed from the surface of the nucleus.
Reality Check is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 19th June 2019, 09:14 PM   #4168
Reality Check
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: New Zealand
Posts: 26,238
Thumbs down The usual lies, delusions, insults, etc. already addressed over the last 10 years

Originally Posted by Sol88 View Post
...
The usual insane lies, delusions, insults, etc. already addressed over the last 10 years.

Utter insanity from Sol88 of asking me to explain his demented electric comet to him !
If a cometary "electric circuit" is not in the standard model as he wrote then it must be part of his demented dogma.

Sol88's usual insane lies.
Comets are still ices and dust as they have been for 70 years. We may change the ratio of ices to dust for an average comet with more evidence. That is not Sol88's demented cult dogma of comets of actual rock blasted from rocky planets.

Last edited by Reality Check; 19th June 2019 at 09:19 PM.
Reality Check is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 20th June 2019, 12:48 AM   #4169
Sol88
Philosopher
 
Sol88's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 5,044
Great!

Glad we cleared that up.

So, we both agree with M.A'Hearn, comets are MOSTLY ROCK.

As per

Quote:
(c) What are comets made of?

At the simplest level, a very basic question is whether comets are mostly ice or mostly rock/dirt/refractory material. Whipple’s [2] model of the dirty snowball, the first quantitative model, envisioned cometary nuclei as mostly ice, although our understanding has been evolving more toward mostly rock, particularly for 67P/C-G for which refractory/volatile ratios as high as 6 have been cited [3,4].

Nevertheless, there is still considerable uncertainty about even this basic parameter, not least of which is that most measurements are subject to selection effects in removing refractories from the nucleus to the coma, where they are observed as dust.

With improvements in remote sensing over the last decade and particularly the wealth of measurements from Rosetta, we are making large strides in answering the question of which volatiles (ices) are near the surface of cometary nuclei, and the Deep Impact experiment implies that the near-surface volatiles are representative of the deeper interior [5,6].

The indications are that there is a large dispersion in relative abundances with only very limited correlations between relative abundances and any other parameters. On the other hand, we know very little about the abundance of the many possible refractory species.

As noted above, there were great advances from the Stardust mission, particularly the clear demonstration that cometary silicate grains had been transported from near the Sun to the region of cometary formation, but the selection effects in collecting the returned samples make it almost impossible to say much quantitatively about the bulk abundances of refractories [7].
__________________
“No rock. Any charge separation is limited. The electric field is pointing in the wrong direction. Currents are doing nothing.” Jonesdave116.

“The 'electric comet' is physically IMPOSSIBLE to model using mainstream science! PERIOD! True story! End of story!” Indagator

Last edited by Sol88; 20th June 2019 at 12:50 AM.
Sol88 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 20th June 2019, 12:54 AM   #4170
Sol88
Philosopher
 
Sol88's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 5,044
Originally Posted by Reality Check View Post
The usual insane lies, delusions, insults, etc. already addressed over the last 10 years.


We may change the ratio of ices to dust for an average comet with more evidence.
Which is the
Quote:
although our understanding has been evolving more toward mostly rock, particularly for 67P/C-G for which refractory/volatile ratios as high as 6 have been cited
You do understand EVOLVE, don't you?

So yeah you are correct We may change the ratio of ices to dust for an average comet with more evidence.


In fact so much that our understanding has been evolving towards MOSTLY ROCK! (as stated by the ELECTRIC COMET)

That's quite some change in ratio from Whipple's model...
__________________
“No rock. Any charge separation is limited. The electric field is pointing in the wrong direction. Currents are doing nothing.” Jonesdave116.

“The 'electric comet' is physically IMPOSSIBLE to model using mainstream science! PERIOD! True story! End of story!” Indagator
Sol88 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 20th June 2019, 03:08 AM   #4171
jonesdave116
Illuminator
 
jonesdave116's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Posts: 3,938
Originally Posted by Sol88 View Post
Electrostatics, lol. You're still thinking pith balls, sport, this is obvious out of your league.

You should really learn about plasma and electrodynamics.

What's your take on ALICE and the detection that 67P is IMMERSED in a charged nano dust environment?

All you can see is shinny ice! hilarious!

Beginner.
You really are stupid. The field is retarding electrons. What sign are they? Why would it do anything different to dust? Seriously, get an education.
__________________
“There is in every village a torch - the teacher; and an extinguisher - the priest.” - Victor Hugo

“Never argue with an idiot. They will only bring you down to their level and beat you with experience.” - George Carlin
jonesdave116 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 20th June 2019, 03:10 AM   #4172
jonesdave116
Illuminator
 
jonesdave116's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Posts: 3,938
Originally Posted by Sol88 View Post
Great!

Glad we cleared that up.

So, we both agree with M.A'Hearn, comets are MOSTLY ROCK.

As per



No rock ever detected at a comet. Period. You therefore fail. No lightning bolts blasting granite, sandstone, limestone or basalt off of planets. Mind you, only an idiot could believe that in the first place.
__________________
“There is in every village a torch - the teacher; and an extinguisher - the priest.” - Victor Hugo

“Never argue with an idiot. They will only bring you down to their level and beat you with experience.” - George Carlin
jonesdave116 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 20th June 2019, 03:15 AM   #4173
jonesdave116
Illuminator
 
jonesdave116's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Posts: 3,938
Originally Posted by Sol88 View Post
Which is the

You do understand EVOLVE, don't you?

So yeah you are correct We may change the ratio of ices to dust for an average comet with more evidence.


In fact so much that our understanding has been evolving towards MOSTLY ROCK! (as stated by the ELECTRIC COMET)

That's quite some change in ratio from Whipple's model...
Who cares, woo boy? Whipple was a damn sight closer to the mark than the mythologist idiots of EU, wasn't he? That would be due to him actually understanding the relevant science. You and your fellow cultists don't. No mechanisms, no science, no evidence. 100% failure. How about dealing with that failure, rather than your pathetic attempts at discrediting a model that is seen to work? With evidence. With mechanisms. With science. When are you going to show us some science? Instead of making an idiot of yourself by continually failing to understand it? This is what home schooling gets you!
__________________
“There is in every village a torch - the teacher; and an extinguisher - the priest.” - Victor Hugo

“Never argue with an idiot. They will only bring you down to their level and beat you with experience.” - George Carlin
jonesdave116 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 20th June 2019, 03:21 AM   #4174
jonesdave116
Illuminator
 
jonesdave116's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Posts: 3,938
Originally Posted by Sol88 View Post
Then explain the electrical circuit the comet operates in, using electrodynamics.

IT IS NOT IN THE STANDARD MODEL, AT ALL.


that's what was the first quantitative model, we have evolved since that time to...



Ice....good one!
What circuit? There isn't one. That is a figment of your untutored mind. And there is plenty of ice. Want all the links again, so that you can ignore them again? Why are you here? You lost 14 years ago. What is your problem? You are possibly the only person on the planet who believes this EC crap. What are your qualifications? Why the hell would anybody take any notice of you? Go take your idiotic, mythology-based, quasi-religion elsewhere. It is unscientific garbage, promulgated by idiots who have no idea about science.
__________________
“There is in every village a torch - the teacher; and an extinguisher - the priest.” - Victor Hugo

“Never argue with an idiot. They will only bring you down to their level and beat you with experience.” - George Carlin
jonesdave116 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 20th June 2019, 04:05 AM   #4175
Sol88
Philosopher
 
Sol88's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 5,044
Originally Posted by jonesdave116 View Post
You really are stupid. The field is retarding electrons. What sign are they? Why would it do anything different to dust? Seriously, get an education.

Would you, jonesdave116, be prepared to engage in a little more educational and less confrontational method to this thread?

You know, it’s handy and all for people to just pick this thread out any one of its hundreds of pages now and for that matter, the old against the mainstream thread from waaaaaa, aaaay back and see the same arguments that reality check just thrives on, along with a complete running tally sheet of my lies, delusions and stupidity and not miss a beat.

So I propose that I present peer reviewed, mainstream papers, accepted, stamped with blue ink and carbon copied in triplicate, versions of comet 67P only and you tell me how they apply to the DIRTYSNOWBALL MODEL.

anddddd unless you run away and hide under mummy’s skirt, you will present a coherent answer to the following question I’ve asked politely on multiple occasions and got crickets so, if Whipple’s DIRTYSNOWBALL MODEL, the first AND currently quantitative, accepted and applied model, your talking complete nonsensical fairy tales. This maybe interpreted in the most strict form as trolling

You have no model, or at least won’t tell me whilst ya cheer squad bangs on from the sidelines that comets ARE ice and dust with a ratio that’s obviously quite fluid. This is as A’Hearn asserts in a peer reviewed mainstream paper.

Quote:
At the simplest level, a very basic question is whether comets are mostly ice or mostly rock/dirt/refractory material. Whipple’s [2] model of the dirty snowball, the first quantitative model, envisioned cometary nuclei as mostly ice, although our understanding has been evolving more toward mostly rock, particularly for 67P/C-G for which refractory/volatile ratios as high as 6 have been cited [3,4].
Electric comet = rock (Meteoric/Asteroidal rock) Whipple’s models = ice.

This is the crux of the whole fun and games in the above volley of nonsense. This would be solved, reckon, in the manner I’ve described.



You game?
__________________
“No rock. Any charge separation is limited. The electric field is pointing in the wrong direction. Currents are doing nothing.” Jonesdave116.

“The 'electric comet' is physically IMPOSSIBLE to model using mainstream science! PERIOD! True story! End of story!” Indagator
Sol88 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 20th June 2019, 04:12 AM   #4176
Sol88
Philosopher
 
Sol88's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 5,044
Originally Posted by jonesdave116 View Post
You really are stupid. The field is retarding electrons. What sign are they? Why would it do anything different to dust? Seriously, get an education.
Let’s give stoopid a lesson ay?

What can you tell me about the fact that Rosetta at times flew through clouds of charged NANO dust, negatively charged along with negatively charged compact and fluffy dust, that arrives in tight colimated energetic bursts and showers (jets) along with suprathermal electrons.

I’ll pull the paper titles and abstracts for you and you tell me how that applies to the Dirtysnowball model.
__________________
“No rock. Any charge separation is limited. The electric field is pointing in the wrong direction. Currents are doing nothing.” Jonesdave116.

“The 'electric comet' is physically IMPOSSIBLE to model using mainstream science! PERIOD! True story! End of story!” Indagator
Sol88 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 20th June 2019, 04:45 AM   #4177
jonesdave116
Illuminator
 
jonesdave116's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Posts: 3,938
Originally Posted by Sol88 View Post
Let’s give stoopid a lesson ay?

What can you tell me about the fact that Rosetta at times flew through clouds of charged NANO dust, negatively charged along with negatively charged compact and fluffy dust, that arrives in tight colimated energetic bursts and showers (jets) along with suprathermal electrons.

I’ll pull the paper titles and abstracts for you and you tell me how that applies to the Dirtysnowball model.
And what the hell has that got to do with an electric field that is retarding electrons and accelerating ions? Answer.
__________________
“There is in every village a torch - the teacher; and an extinguisher - the priest.” - Victor Hugo

“Never argue with an idiot. They will only bring you down to their level and beat you with experience.” - George Carlin
jonesdave116 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 20th June 2019, 04:48 AM   #4178
jonesdave116
Illuminator
 
jonesdave116's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Posts: 3,938
Originally Posted by Sol88 View Post
Would you, jonesdave116, be prepared to engage in a little more educational and less confrontational method to this thread?

You know, it’s handy and all for people to just pick this thread out any one of its hundreds of pages now and for that matter, the old against the mainstream thread from waaaaaa, aaaay back and see the same arguments that reality check just thrives on, along with a complete running tally sheet of my lies, delusions and stupidity and not miss a beat.

So I propose that I present peer reviewed, mainstream papers, accepted, stamped with blue ink and carbon copied in triplicate, versions of comet 67P only and you tell me how they apply to the DIRTYSNOWBALL MODEL.

anddddd unless you run away and hide under mummy’s skirt, you will present a coherent answer to the following question I’ve asked politely on multiple occasions and got crickets so, if Whipple’s DIRTYSNOWBALL MODEL, the first AND currently quantitative, accepted and applied model, your talking complete nonsensical fairy tales. This maybe interpreted in the most strict form as trolling

You have no model, or at least won’t tell me whilst ya cheer squad bangs on from the sidelines that comets ARE ice and dust with a ratio that’s obviously quite fluid. This is as A’Hearn asserts in a peer reviewed mainstream paper.



Electric comet = rock (Meteoric/Asteroidal rock) Whipple’s models = ice.

This is the crux of the whole fun and games in the above volley of nonsense. This would be solved, reckon, in the manner I’ve described.



You game?
Stop talking crap. You have a 100% failed model. Deal with it. None of your misunderstandings and obfuscations are going to change that. Your model failed. As proven. End of thread. If you want to start a thread on real comets, then do so. This is about the long falsified electric comet woo. Either deal with that or go away.
__________________
“There is in every village a torch - the teacher; and an extinguisher - the priest.” - Victor Hugo

“Never argue with an idiot. They will only bring you down to their level and beat you with experience.” - George Carlin
jonesdave116 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 20th June 2019, 05:27 AM   #4179
Sol88
Philosopher
 
Sol88's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 5,044
Originally Posted by jonesdave116 View Post
And what the hell has that got to do with an electric field that is retarding electrons and accelerating ions? Answer.

Let’s roll the dice, ay!

Plasma properties of suprathermal electrons near comet 67P/Churyumov-Gerasimenko with Rosetta
M. Myllys, P. Henri, M. Galand, K.L. Héritier, N. Gilet, R. Goldstein, A. I. Eriksson, F. Johansson, J. Deca

I say electric field/double layer, charged nucleus (polarisation electric field) related.

What ya reckon jonesdave116?

Hint, these are negatively charged particles coming from the nucleus. There they are in all their recorded glory and you say doesn’t and can’t happen, no mechanism.

So, what’s going on there cob?
__________________
“No rock. Any charge separation is limited. The electric field is pointing in the wrong direction. Currents are doing nothing.” Jonesdave116.

“The 'electric comet' is physically IMPOSSIBLE to model using mainstream science! PERIOD! True story! End of story!” Indagator

Last edited by Sol88; 20th June 2019 at 05:30 AM.
Sol88 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 20th June 2019, 06:09 AM   #4180
Sol88
Philosopher
 
Sol88's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 5,044
Originally Posted by jonesdave116 View Post
And what the hell has that got to do with an electric field that is retarding electrons and accelerating ions? Answer.
Ok, ok I understand you now.

So Electron acceleration at comet 67P/Churyumov-Gerasimenko
R. Goldstein, J. L. Burch, K. Llera, P. Mokashi, H. Nilsson, K. Dokgo, A. Eriksson, E. Odelstad, I. Richter

Electrons may not be the only thing being retarded.


My moneys on an Electric field.
__________________
“No rock. Any charge separation is limited. The electric field is pointing in the wrong direction. Currents are doing nothing.” Jonesdave116.

“The 'electric comet' is physically IMPOSSIBLE to model using mainstream science! PERIOD! True story! End of story!” Indagator
Sol88 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 20th June 2019, 06:15 AM   #4181
Sol88
Philosopher
 
Sol88's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 5,044
Originally Posted by jonesdave116 View Post
And what the hell has that got to do with an electric field that is retarding electrons and accelerating ions? Answer.
RPC-MIP observations at comet 67P/Churyumov-Gerasimenko explained by a model including a sheath and two populations of electrons
G. Wattieaux, N. Gilet, P. Henri, X. Vallières, L. Bucciantini

Did I just wet my pants?

Sheath and two electron populations?

Sheath...double layer?

And now poor jonesy going have to explain two populations of electrons being retarded.



Still keen jonesdave116?
__________________
“No rock. Any charge separation is limited. The electric field is pointing in the wrong direction. Currents are doing nothing.” Jonesdave116.

“The 'electric comet' is physically IMPOSSIBLE to model using mainstream science! PERIOD! True story! End of story!” Indagator
Sol88 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 20th June 2019, 06:19 AM   #4182
Sol88
Philosopher
 
Sol88's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 5,044
Dynamic field line draping at comet 67P/Churyumov-Gerasimenko during the Rosetta dayside excursion

Ahhh, me ‘ol mate tusenfem. Good to see another paper confirming some of my prediction.

No wonder he bailed when he did.

M. Volwerk, C. Goetz, E. Behar, M. Delva, N. J. T. Edberg, A. Eriksson, P. Henri, K. LLera, H. Nilsson, I. Richter, G. Stenberg Wieser, K.-H. Glassmeier
__________________
“No rock. Any charge separation is limited. The electric field is pointing in the wrong direction. Currents are doing nothing.” Jonesdave116.

“The 'electric comet' is physically IMPOSSIBLE to model using mainstream science! PERIOD! True story! End of story!” Indagator
Sol88 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 20th June 2019, 12:23 PM   #4183
jonesdave116
Illuminator
 
jonesdave116's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Posts: 3,938
Originally Posted by Sol88 View Post
Dynamic field line draping at comet 67P/Churyumov-Gerasimenko during the Rosetta dayside excursion

Ahhh, me ‘ol mate tusenfem. Good to see another paper confirming some of my prediction.

No wonder he bailed when he did.

M. Volwerk, C. Goetz, E. Behar, M. Delva, N. J. T. Edberg, A. Eriksson, P. Henri, K. LLera, H. Nilsson, I. Richter, G. Stenberg Wieser, K.-H. Glassmeier
Rubbish. Show us where you predicted field line draping prior to its first suggestion in 1957, and its confirmation at Halley in '86. Give it a rest. You have totally failed.
__________________
“There is in every village a torch - the teacher; and an extinguisher - the priest.” - Victor Hugo

“Never argue with an idiot. They will only bring you down to their level and beat you with experience.” - George Carlin
jonesdave116 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 20th June 2019, 12:27 PM   #4184
tusenfem
Master Poster
 
tusenfem's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 2,602
Originally Posted by Sol88 View Post
Dynamic field line draping at comet 67P/Churyumov-Gerasimenko during the Rosetta dayside excursion

Ahhh, me ‘ol mate tusenfem. Good to see another paper confirming some of my prediction.

No wonder he bailed when he did.

M. Volwerk, C. Goetz, E. Behar, M. Delva, N. J. T. Edberg, A. Eriksson, P. Henri, K. LLera, H. Nilsson, I. Richter, G. Stenberg Wieser, K.-H. Glassmeier
rotflol
__________________
20 minutes into the future
This message is bra-bra-brought to you by z-z-z-zik zak
And-And-And I'm going to be back with you - on Network 23 after these real-real-real-really exciting messages

(Max Headroom)
follow me on twitter: @tusenfem, or follow Rosetta Plasma Consortium: @Rosetta_RPC
tusenfem is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 20th June 2019, 12:30 PM   #4185
jonesdave116
Illuminator
 
jonesdave116's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Posts: 3,938
Originally Posted by Sol88 View Post
RPC-MIP observations at comet 67P/Churyumov-Gerasimenko explained by a model including a sheath and two populations of electrons
G. Wattieaux, N. Gilet, P. Henri, X. Vallières, L. Bucciantini

Did I just wet my pants?

Sheath and two electron populations?

Sheath...double layer?

And now poor jonesy going have to explain two populations of electrons being retarded.



Still keen jonesdave116?
Stop trying to understand papers that are beyond you. No double layers ever seen at a comet. Tell us where in that paper there is anything about double layers. Quote it. Tell us what Wattieaux says about the populations of electrons. Quote the relevant passages. Get on with it, and quit lying.
__________________
“There is in every village a torch - the teacher; and an extinguisher - the priest.” - Victor Hugo

“Never argue with an idiot. They will only bring you down to their level and beat you with experience.” - George Carlin
jonesdave116 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 20th June 2019, 01:26 PM   #4186
jonesdave116
Illuminator
 
jonesdave116's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Posts: 3,938
Originally Posted by Sol88 View Post
Ok, ok I understand you now.

So Electron acceleration at comet 67P/Churyumov-Gerasimenko
R. Goldstein, J. L. Burch, K. Llera, P. Mokashi, H. Nilsson, K. Dokgo, A. Eriksson, E. Odelstad, I. Richter

Electrons may not be the only thing being retarded.


My moneys on an Electric field.
And where do they say that an ambipolar field that is retarding electrons, is also accelerating them? I don't think you've quite got the grasp of this + & - thing.
__________________
“There is in every village a torch - the teacher; and an extinguisher - the priest.” - Victor Hugo

“Never argue with an idiot. They will only bring you down to their level and beat you with experience.” - George Carlin
jonesdave116 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 20th June 2019, 01:29 PM   #4187
jonesdave116
Illuminator
 
jonesdave116's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Posts: 3,938
Originally Posted by Sol88 View Post
Let’s roll the dice, ay!

Plasma properties of suprathermal electrons near comet 67P/Churyumov-Gerasimenko with Rosetta
M. Myllys, P. Henri, M. Galand, K.L. Héritier, N. Gilet, R. Goldstein, A. I. Eriksson, F. Johansson, J. Deca

I say electric field/double layer, charged nucleus (polarisation electric field) related.

What ya reckon jonesdave116?

Hint, these are negatively charged particles coming from the nucleus. There they are in all their recorded glory and you say doesn’t and can’t happen, no mechanism.

So, what’s going on there cob?
What's going on is nothing to do with your failed woo. No rock, no EDM, no discharges. No double layers. Electric field pointing the wrong way. Asteroid surfaces are more charged than outgassing comets. This all proves your woo to be a failure. And you keep ignoring it, because you cannot let your religion go. Sad.
__________________
“There is in every village a torch - the teacher; and an extinguisher - the priest.” - Victor Hugo

“Never argue with an idiot. They will only bring you down to their level and beat you with experience.” - George Carlin
jonesdave116 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 20th June 2019, 03:36 PM   #4188
Reality Check
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: New Zealand
Posts: 26,238
Thumbs down The insane insults of the deceased Michael Francis A'Hearn

Originally Posted by Sol88 View Post
...
The insane insults of the deceased Michael Francis A'Hearn by Sol88 linking him with demented dogma, etc.

The usual insane lies, delusions, insults, etc. already addressed over the last 10 years.
Reality Check is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 20th June 2019, 03:37 PM   #4189
Reality Check
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: New Zealand
Posts: 26,238
Thumbs down The insane insults of the deceased Michael Francis A'Hearn

Originally Posted by Sol88 View Post
...
The insane insults of the deceased Michael Francis A'Hearn by Sol88 linking him with demented dogma, etc.

The usual insane lies, delusions, insults, etc. already addressed over the last 10 years.
Reality Check is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 20th June 2019, 03:38 PM   #4190
Reality Check
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: New Zealand
Posts: 26,238
Thumbs down The insane insults of the deceased Michael Francis A'Hearn

Originally Posted by Sol88 View Post
...
The insane insults of the deceased Michael Francis A'Hearn by Sol88 linking him with demented dogma, etc.

The usual insane lies, delusions, insults, etc. already addressed over the last 10 years.
Reality Check is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 20th June 2019, 03:40 PM   #4191
Reality Check
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: New Zealand
Posts: 26,238
Thumbs down The usual lies, delusions, insults, etc. already addressed over the last 10 years

Originally Posted by Sol88 View Post
...
The usual insane lies, delusions, insults, etc. already addressed over the last 10 years.

Sol88's usual insanity of asking demented questions not on his electric comet dogma.

Last edited by Reality Check; 20th June 2019 at 03:53 PM.
Reality Check is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 20th June 2019, 03:53 PM   #4192
Sol88
Philosopher
 
Sol88's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 5,044
Originally Posted by tusenfem View Post
rotflol
Good to see you again.
__________________
“No rock. Any charge separation is limited. The electric field is pointing in the wrong direction. Currents are doing nothing.” Jonesdave116.

“The 'electric comet' is physically IMPOSSIBLE to model using mainstream science! PERIOD! True story! End of story!” Indagator
Sol88 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 20th June 2019, 03:55 PM   #4193
Reality Check
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: New Zealand
Posts: 26,238
Thumbs down The usual lies, delusions, insults, etc. already addressed over the last 10 years

Originally Posted by Sol88 View Post
...
The usual insane lies, delusions, insults, etc. already addressed over the last 10 years.

Sol88's usual insanity of citing mainstream ices and dust papers in a thread on his demented electric comet dogma.
Sol88's usual insane lies about those papers.
Sol88's usual insane lies about physics.
Sol88's usual insane lies about posts.

Last edited by Reality Check; 20th June 2019 at 03:56 PM.
Reality Check is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 20th June 2019, 03:56 PM   #4194
Sol88
Philosopher
 
Sol88's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 5,044
Originally Posted by jonesdave116 View Post
And where do they say that an ambipolar field that is retarding electrons, is also accelerating them? I don't think you've quite got the grasp of this + & - thing.

Papers not released yet.

You say no electrons can NOT escape because the electric field points the wrong way...

So, one of us is going to have egg on their face now aren’t they.

Double layers baby.
__________________
“No rock. Any charge separation is limited. The electric field is pointing in the wrong direction. Currents are doing nothing.” Jonesdave116.

“The 'electric comet' is physically IMPOSSIBLE to model using mainstream science! PERIOD! True story! End of story!” Indagator
Sol88 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 20th June 2019, 03:57 PM   #4195
Sol88
Philosopher
 
Sol88's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 5,044
Originally Posted by Reality Check View Post
The usual insane lies, delusions, insults, etc. already addressed over the last 10 years.

Sol88's usual insanity of citing mainstream ices and dust papers in a thread on his demented electric comet dogma.
Sol88's usual insane lies about those papers.
Sol88's usual insane lies about physics.
Sol88's usual insane lies about posts.
Mostly ice or mostly consolidated refractory dust?
__________________
“No rock. Any charge separation is limited. The electric field is pointing in the wrong direction. Currents are doing nothing.” Jonesdave116.

“The 'electric comet' is physically IMPOSSIBLE to model using mainstream science! PERIOD! True story! End of story!” Indagator
Sol88 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 20th June 2019, 04:03 PM   #4196
Reality Check
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: New Zealand
Posts: 26,238
Thumbs down The usual lies, delusions, insults, etc. already addressed over the last 10 years

Originally Posted by Sol88 View Post
...
The usual insane lies, delusions, insults, etc. already addressed over the last 10 years.

Sol88's usual insanity of citing mainstream ices and dust papers in a thread on his demented electric comet dogma.

Sol88's usual delusions. Someone "retarded " (as he wrote) enough to belong to a demented cult and spewing out electric comet dogma is not capable of explaining anything about comets.
Reality Check is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 20th June 2019, 04:04 PM   #4197
Reality Check
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: New Zealand
Posts: 26,238
Thumbs down The usual lies, delusions, insults, etc. already addressed over the last 10 years

Originally Posted by Sol88 View Post
...
The usual insane lies, delusions, insults, etc. already addressed over the last 10 years.

Sol88's usual insanity of citing mainstream ices and dust papers in a thread on his demented electric comet dogma.
Sol88's usual insane lies about those papers.
Sol88's usual insane lies about physics.
Reality Check is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 20th June 2019, 04:05 PM   #4198
jonesdave116
Illuminator
 
jonesdave116's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Posts: 3,938
Originally Posted by Sol88 View Post
Papers not released yet.

You say no electrons can NOT escape because the electric field points the wrong way...

So, one of us is going to have egg on their face now aren’t they.

Double layers baby.
SMH! You really should leave this plasma physics stuff alone! I said nothing. I reported what the authors said. They are (I assume) familiar with plasma physics. If the electrons could never escape, and the ions were, what would happen? Sigh. And if the papers aren't released yet, why are you linking them? There are not even any abstracts! I suspect the one regarding two populations of electrons is to do with warm and cold electrons. They still have a charge of -e.
__________________
“There is in every village a torch - the teacher; and an extinguisher - the priest.” - Victor Hugo

“Never argue with an idiot. They will only bring you down to their level and beat you with experience.” - George Carlin

Last edited by jonesdave116; 20th June 2019 at 04:15 PM.
jonesdave116 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 20th June 2019, 04:05 PM   #4199
Reality Check
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: New Zealand
Posts: 26,238
Thumbs down The usual lies, delusions, insults, etc. already addressed over the last 10 years

Originally Posted by Sol88 View Post
...
The usual insane lies, delusions, insults, etc. already addressed over the last 10 years.

Sol88's usual insanity of citing mainstream ices and dust papers in a thread on his demented electric comet dogma.
Sol88's usual insane lies about those papers.
Sol88's usual insults of posters.
Reality Check is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 20th June 2019, 04:08 PM   #4200
Reality Check
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: New Zealand
Posts: 26,238
Thumbs down The usual lies, delusions, insults, etc. already addressed over the last 10 years

Originally Posted by Sol88 View Post
...
The usual insane lies, delusions, insults, etc. already addressed over the last 10 years.

Sol88's usual insane lies ("Papers not released yet") .
Sol88's usual insane lies about posts - there is no "You say no electrons can NOT escape because the electric field points the wrong way" post.
Sol88's usual insane "double layer" lie.

Last edited by Reality Check; 20th June 2019 at 04:15 PM.
Reality Check is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Closed Thread

International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » Science, Mathematics, Medicine, and Technology

Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 08:46 AM.
Powered by vBulletin. Copyright ©2000 - 2020, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

This forum began as part of the James Randi Education Foundation (JREF). However, the forum now exists as
an independent entity with no affiliation with or endorsement by the JREF, including the section in reference to "JREF" topics.

Disclaimer: Messages posted in the Forum are solely the opinion of their authors.