The Electric Comet Theory /SAFIRE Part V

[jonesdave116]

Originally Posted by Sol88

Comets are rocky objects discharging in the solar wind.

Is an outright lie. Show us the rock, show us the discharges. Can't. Therefore you are lying. As usual.

[jonesdave116]

Originally Posted by Sol88

Sorry, better put, what stop the solar wind from reaching the surface
?

Collisions with outgassing neutrals or the electric field as described by Deca?



Deca


Or


The diamagnetic cavity?

Is another outright lie. Getting sick of this. Deca says nothing about the diamagnetic cavity. For anybody who can read, he is talking about the comet at low outgassing rates. When there is no DC!!!!! Another total failure of comprehension. And there is no way an electric field is stopping the solar wind. Seriously? How much longer do we have to put up with this idiocy?

[jonesdave116]

Originally Posted by Sol88

No, I have a good grasp on the history of space plasma physics.

Hahahahahahahahahahahaha! Is another outright lie. SMH!

[jonesdave116]

Originally Posted by Sol88

You mean, no mechanism in the Dirtysnowball model?

In the real world...

EDM (lol) The charge state of electrostatically transported dust on regolith surfaces


We see the same at active asteroids... strangely enough.

Is more lying and scientific illiteracy. Why are the vast majority of asteroids not outgassing? Answer the question.

[jonesdave116]

Originally Posted by Sol88

No need to, mainstreams coming round...

So, you believe in the quaint bedtime story of comets are the leftovers from the formation of the solar system. Nice story with a happy ending. About as much evidence as giant lightning bolts ripping planets apart really.

Comets are rocky bodies discharging in the solar wind. If you’d like to get tangled up in maths go ahead.

Maths gave you a highly porous comet with no ice, it has also given you a consolidated comets... some with ice others mostly rock...

The Dirtysnowball.

Which they tell me is incorrect but have no other model, so default, for lack of any other model we still use less snowy more dirty balls.

Do you like dirty balls, jean tate?

Lying again. Don't you ever get sick of propping up your scientifically impossible crap with lies?

[jonesdave116]

Originally Posted by Sol88

Oh, deary me...

The charge state of electrostatically transported dust on regolith surfaces

So the charged dust leaves the surface of a comet as per the ELECTRIC COMET. Sublimation is a nice bedtime story.

Are you feeling sleepy yet, jean tate? I could read you another chapter from your book?

Is more lying. The same will happen at asteroids. And they are not lit up like the 4th of July. And you cannot explain why. And refuse to even answer the question. You are just posing for the non-existent lurkers. Your woo is below astrology in terms of believability. And in scientific content.

[jonesdave116]

Originally Posted by Sol88

Comets are rocky bodies and represent a continuum with Asteroids.

Nope. No rock ever detected at a comet. So, that is yet one more lie. Sigh.

[jonesdave116]

Originally Posted by Sol88

What stops the solar wind from reaching the surface of the comet? the neutrals from "outgasssing" or the electric field, tusenfem?

You have already been told this, you liar. Refer to the AMPTE experiments. As I linked not more than a handful of posts back. No comet. No rock. Just gas. Get it through your head, yes? Lern to scienz. You are getting tiresome with this endless lying and inability to understand even basic science.
Go away, get an education, and stop troubling the good people here with your uneducated idiocy.

[Sol88]

There you go jean tate, succinctly put by jonesdave116..


What are your thoughts on Martin Pätzold‘s paper The Nucleus of Comet 67P/ChuryumovGerasimenko - Part I: The Global View – nucleus mass, mass loss, porosity and implications

In particular and assuming he has a good head for numbers....

Quote:

and, not so unrealistically, the nucleus would be a highly porous stony agglomerate, essentially devoid of volitiles.

Maths says no ice...poo pooed by the main inquisition master, Jonesdave116.

Along with a raft of other papers that call the Dirtysnowball into question, this is the mainstream condensation sublimation model.

Even maths cannot untangle the mess that is the Dirtysnowball.


Mathamagicians can work majic....

[Sol88]

Originally Posted by jonesdave116

You have already been told this, you liar. Refer to the AMPTE experiments. As I linked not more than a handful of posts back. No comet. No rock. Just gas. Get it through your head, yes? Lern to scienz. You are getting tiresome with this endless lying and inability to understand even basic science.
Go away, get an education, and stop troubling the good people here with your uneducated idiocy.

So collisions it is for jonesdave116.

Even tusenfem backed out of this one.

You’ve been shown just as many papers that call this into doubt and low and behold poo pooed by you.

[Sol88]

Originally Posted by jonesdave116

Is an outright lie. Show us the rock, show us the discharges. Can't. Therefore you are lying. As usual.

Have, you don't like it, therefore because it messes with you faith system it can not be true!

like me to list the authors of mainstream paper canned by you?

[jonesdave116]

Originally Posted by Sol88

There you go jean tate, succinctly put by jonesdave116..


What are your thoughts on Martin Pätzold‘s paper The Nucleus of Comet 67P/ChuryumovGerasimenko - Part I: The Global View – nucleus mass, mass loss, porosity and implications

In particular and assuming he has a good head for numbers....


Maths says no ice...poo pooed by the main inquisition master, Jonesdave116.

Along with a raft of other papers that call the Dirtysnowball into question, this is the mainstream condensation sublimation model.

Even maths cannot untangle the mess that is the Dirtysnowball.


Mathamagicians can work majic....

Scientifically illiterate crap. As usual. Do you never get sick of lying, you clown?
I will ask this one more time;

Where is your 'theory'?

Why are asteroids not lit up like comets?

Here is a suggestion - sod off, and go post your idiotic woo where some idiot might believe it. Yes? Which is not here, is it? Obviously. Did you manage to get past primary school science? That question is obviously rhetorical. Lol. Go away, woo boy, nobody takes idiots seriously on here.

[jonesdave116]

Originally Posted by Sol88

Have, you don't like it, therefore because it messes with you faith system it can not be true!

like me to list the authors of mainstream paper canned by you?

Liar.

[jonesdave116]

Originally Posted by Sol88

So collisions it is for jonesdave116.

Even tusenfem backed out of this one.

You’ve been shown just as many papers that call this into doubt and low and behold poo pooed by you.

Liar. Tusenfem did no such thing, you lying POS. I asked you to explain the AMPTE experiments, you lying, obfuscating clown. Would you please get on with it?

[jonesdave116]

Seriously, how much longer do we have to put up with this idiot? When is enough enough? The bloke is obviously scientifically illiterate. And yet the gateholders of this place see fit to let it keep posting. Anywhere else? Gone. Banned. If not banned, then shoved into the woo section. Why does this place keep letting such idiots post their woo? Advertising? Hits? Who the hell knows? However, I cannot imagine it was what the founder had in mind.
Get rid of these idiots, and maybe get some decent posters back. Yes?

[Sol88]

Geez Louise, take it easy mate, you’ll blow a poopit valve!

[Sol88]

Originally Posted by jonesdave116

Liar. Tusenfem did no such thing, you lying POS. I asked you to explain the AMPTE experiments, you lying, obfuscating clown. Would you please get on with it?

Just to be sure and for prosperity. Jonesdave116 says the solar wind colliding with neutrals released from the comet via "outgassing" stops the solar wind from reaching the surface of the comet?

AS in the AMPTE experiment releasing neutral Barium and forming a magnetic cavity which slows and deflects the solar wind?

Please, correct if I've misinterpreted your understanding of diamagnetic cavity formation.

Am I correct in thinking this your understanding, jd116?

[tusenfem]

Originally Posted by Sol88

Comets are rocky objects discharging in the solar wind.

Define discharging

Originally Posted by Sol88

Never changed the ELECTRIC COMET philosophy.

Never presented a model electric comet idea.

Originally Posted by Sol88

You should talk with Deca, might make some insights.

Maybe when I see him im Vienna in May, I am sure he is going to say "you should really listen to Sol88, he is such a genius'.

Originally Posted by Sol88

Also, care to answer the question of whether the solar wind is stop by collisions, increased ”outgassing” or an electric field as described by Deca?

For Halley and the barium release experiments the neutral-ion friction was enough to stand off the magnetic field from the comet. Thus for high outgassing rates.
For intermediate outgassing rates, like 67P the electrons also play a role.
Read it all in the literature, starting with Goetz et al. [2016]

[tusenfem]

Originally Posted by Sol88

Money is on this though...

Apossible mechanism for the formation of magnetic field dropouts in the coma of 67P/Churyumov–Gerasimenko

Ah, Zhenguang Huang's paper.
It was a nice idea, but like the electric comet, it needs magic.
These pockets of hot electrons just magically appear in his model and then of course the diamagnetic effect lowers the magnetic field because of pressure balance.

[jonesdave116]

Originally Posted by Sol88

Just to be sure and for prosperity. Jonesdave116 says the solar wind colliding with neutrals released from the comet via "outgassing" stops the solar wind from reaching the surface of the comet?

AS in the AMPTE experiment releasing neutral Barium and forming a magnetic cavity which slows and deflects the solar wind?

Please, correct if I've misinterpreted your understanding of diamagnetic cavity formation.

Am I correct in thinking this your understanding, jd116?

Sorry? Do you need to borrow a brain? What the hell else could form the DC from nothing more than a release of Ba gas? The canister from which it was exploded? God? Magic? Get an education, and then try to understand the papers.

[jonesdave116]

Let me set this out in explicit terms for the hard of thinking;

AMPTE released gas into the solar wind. No dust. There were no comets with squillions of kms. No rock. No discharges. Zilch. Just gas. Neutral gas. Which gets photo-ionised. I'm guessing that they chose Ba and Li, because it photo-ionises quickly, in comparison to water. Just a guess, though. Having become ionised, the gas mass loads the solar wind, deflects it, and a DC is formed. Just as we see the gas doing at comets. As predicted, as observed.
I can think of a couple of 12 year olds who could grasp this, given a brief explanation, and a couple of minutes to get their heads around it. It is not my fault that certain people are further down the intelligence scale than said 12 year olds.
It ain't rocket science.

[Sol88]

Originally Posted by tusenfem

Define discharging

Never presented a model electric comet idea.

For Halley and the barium release experiments the neutral-ion friction was enough to stand off the magnetic field from the comet. Thus for high outgassing rates.
For intermediate outgassing rates, like 67P the electrons also play a role.
Read it all in the literature, starting with Goetz et al. [2016]

Discharging in context of a charged rocky body.

Well one of my main mechanism was the removal of charge, mostly in the form of the dust and there mostly negative charge. We observe these fluffy clusters Of charged dust arrive in showers and bursts by GIADA. This dust is also effected by Rosetta’s charge.

We established a few pages ago, the negatively charged dust that also appears to be positive further from the nucleus, should respond the the electric fields, electric currents as described in a quite a few linked papers by great scientists.

So the comet seems to trade mass to try and reach some potential balance with the surrounding plasma, the solar wind.

I’m calling this a discharge in the overall picture of a comets AND asteroids.


Nothing wrong at all with Deca’s paper and others. I was all excited of course because there was the charge seperation in a mainstream paper with maths and all.

So not sure how I could prove it to you though.

[Sol88]

Originally Posted by tusenfem

For Halley and the barium release experiments the neutral-ion friction was enough to stand off the magnetic field from the comet. Thus for high outgassing rates.
For intermediate outgassing rates, like 67P the electrons also play a role.
Read it all in the literature, starting with Goetz et al. [2016]

Right, on neutral-ion friction, are Erik Vigren and Anders I. Eriksson paper Onthe ion-neutral coupling in cometary comae correct with there maths? Assuming so and I assume, and please correct me tusenfem before reality check jumps in, friction and coupling in this context are the same?

Assuming so,

Quote:

In a cometary coma, the ion-neutral decoupling distance, sometimes referred to as the ion exobase or collisionopause, can be defined as the cometocentric distance, rin, where ions, initially moving with the neutral outgassing speed, have a probability of 1/e of not colliding with neutrals on their subsequent journey radially outwards.

Aaaand cherry picking quotes

Quote:

Moreover, already at this distance, the effective ion speed can be expected to markedly exceed the neutral expansion velocity.

Quote:

The presence of a non-negligible ambipolar electric field and limited importance of ion-neutral collisional coupling are further supported by observations in the diamagnetic cavity of comet 67P/Churyumov–Gerasimenko by plasma instruments onboard Rosetta that reveal ion speeds several times higher than the neutral expansion velocity.

So as for the post above I’m throwing the charged dust leaving the nucleus as visually observed into this complicated mix of all sorts of fun stuff going on.

But back to Apossible mechanism for the formation of magnetic field dropouts in the coma of 67P/Churyumov–Gerasimenko

And cherry picking again,

Quote:

Wefindthat a local increase of electron thermal pressure is capable of generating many of the observed features of the diamagnetic regions observed by RPC-MAG. The simulation results show that a magnetic field-free region is formed and the recovery phase of the magnetic field magnitude is faster than the declining phase.

along with the dust removing some of these electrons in “showers” of colimated accelerated dust, ultimately down the tail, in my thinking.

So I’m placing some of my eggs in the basket of Deca’s new paper, using believe it or not, kinetic theory for the plasma. His papers a one of the few that actually treat the electrons with respect they deserve, along with the charged dust.

Most of the above where using electrostatics in their papers, imagine plugging in Deca’s four fluid model.

Pretty close to actually seeing the words Double layer.

You’d at least have to agree this spatial seperation of charges and neutralisation there after as described by Deaca has to have a bearing on field aligned currents, electron and ion beams... and dusty plasma dynamics, all the fun plasma fun stuff. ‘Prolly includes some sorta majic electrochemistry going on, what with all the organics, which seems to be a fair bit of the weight of the dust.

This “fields do nothing” rant from jd116, is difficult to understand when we have data from the Ulysses probe.

So my reading of the latest paper reinforces it’s the

And sunlight would not be sufficient. there is something no one can quite finger. Argawal hit a stump. That gives this stuff, the electrons especially, the kick in the guts it needs to get going.

The patched charge model and application to cometary surfaces by J. Schwan X. Wang H.‐W. Hsu E. Grün M. Horányi The charge state of electrostatically transported dust on regolith surfaces

Is close enough for me to EDM for the initial kick in the guts to get the rock into dust, charged and under the influence of some complicated electric fields including double layers. Discharging.

This forms and sustains the diamagnetic cavity.

I think we are still confusing “outgassing” for the above discharging?

[Reality Check]

Originally Posted by Sol88

...

A spate of insane lies, delusions, insults, etc over the last 2 days.
The thousands of insane lies, delusions, insults, etc. since 6 July 2009 from Sol88 about his cult's electric comet and electric Sun dogma (updated 13 Feb 2020).
Sol88 insanity that we have to visit asteroids to detect that they are active. In Sol88's demented world there may be only 1 active asteroid (dust plumes from Bennu) !
Identified members of this morphology class include has 38 out of the many thousands that we have looked at. The probable causes of the activity are listed where known, e.g. sublimation (which Sol8's demented cult denies is possible!), impact, etc.

Sol88's utter insanity that Pluto is an asteroid.
Pluto is a icy minor planet. No activity that is comet-like has ever been seen. Being active like comets is physically impossible in our sane world because no ices can sublimate at Pluto's vast distance outside of the frost line. Being active like comets in Sol88's insane world would not happen because Pluto does not have Sol88's demented dogma of an eccentric, cometary orbit.
Sol88's insanity about active asteroids shares that his Pluto insanity. They are not comets. They do not have Sol88's demented dogma of an eccentric, cometary orbit .

Next post: Sol88's usual demented questions.
The mainstream mechanism of electrostatic lofting caused by the solar wind is not Sol88's demented dogma. It is very unlikely to become the main mechanism because as he cited, the main mechanisms we have observed are ice sublimating and impact.

Next post: Sol88 persists with many years of insanity abut the use of geology terms by astronomers about comets.
The rocky-like behavior of cometary landslides on 67P/Churyumov-Gerasimenko
Sol88 spews out his insane insult of M. A’Hearn and all astronomers yet again !
Sol88's usual insane lies about papers and even basic English !

Quote:

(ii) upper porosity bound: if ice = 0, then Fnucleus = ∞ and dust (1-poro)- bulk = 0 in (11) and, not so unrealistically, the nucleus would be a highly porous stony agglomerate, essentially devoid of volitiles.

Real comets have at least 17% ices as deduced for 67P! This is a hypothetical comet with no ices as emphasized.
Sol88 persists with "dirtysnowball" insanity that he cannot even get right! It is still the dirty snowball model because we have only a few comets that have more dust than ices as explicitly stated in A'hearn's paper with "evolving toward" more dust than ices ("rock").

Next post: Sol88's usual demented questions.
A diamagnetic cavity forms when the solar wind interacts with a comet coma. A low activity comet has essentially no coma (just some dust) to interact with .

Next post: Sol88's insane lies about the RSI instrument on Rosetta.
The RSI instrument allowed a better measurement of the mass of 67P and thus its density.
Sol88's spews out deluded fantasies about what a charge on 67P would do to Rosetta's measurement. When sane, knowledgeable people do the work Sol88 cannot do, the result is a massive electric field that accelerates solar wind ions to hyper-relativistic speeds producing distinctive radiation that is not detected (and might fry Rosetta!).
Sol88 insanely highlights the phrase "consolidated material". A collection of ice and dust grains is packed together by gravity and cohesion. That is called consolidation. The material produced is obviously consolidated material" !

Next post: Sol88's usual insane lies abut Sol88's demented dogma.
In Sol88's insane world, comets are rocky objects discharging in an imaginary massive solar wind electric field.
In the sane world of real physics, comets outside the frost line with no coma so that the solar wind can reach the nucleus, have dust particle electrostatically charged. These can be lofted into a dust cloud and the start of a blocking coma. No discharges!
Sol88's usual demented questions.

Next post: Sol88 persists with insanity with active asteroids which are evidence against Sol88's demented dogma which "predicts" 100,000's of asteroids must comets if active asteroids are !
Predict in quotes becude the demented rants of Sol88 and his cult cannot predict much. Even when they do they get it wrong and lie about them. The documented deluded crank and liar Wal Thornhill has lied about Deep impact for 15 years and insanely left the blatant lies for anyone to find !

Next post: Sol88's usual insanity of irrelevant mainstream ice and dust comet papers.

Next post: Sol88 spews out his insane insult of M. A’Hearn and all astronomers yet again !
No sane person, especially astronomers, believes in or will believe in Sol88's demented dogma of comets being rock blasted from rocky planets by lightning between planets, etc.

Next post: Sol88 persists in his insanity about mainstream electrostatic lofting by the solar wind.

Next post: Sol88 spews out his insane insult of M. A’Hearn and all astronomers yet again !

Next post: Sol88's usual insane lies about papers, posts and posters.
jonesdave116 wrote several posts, e.g. about the science that has already been cited here which makes Sol88's insanity abut comets clear.
Sol88's usual demented questions.
Anyone reading a mainstream ices and dust comet review paper will read about comets made of ices and dust, not Sol88's demented dogma!

Sol88 persists with insane lies about abut Martin Pätzold‘s paper The Nucleus of Comet 67P/ChuryumovGerasimenko - Part I: The Global View – nucleus mass, mass loss, porosity and implications.
There is no math saying no ice. Sol88 turns basic English into "Maths says no ice". The reality is what Sol88 quotes - an upper porosity limit case: "If there is no ice" then there is high porosity and essentially no volatiles.

Next post: Sol88's usual insane lies about posts and posters.

Next post: Sol88's usual insane lies about posts and posters.
Sol88 has a "faith system" in obviously demented dogma spewed out by his insane cult prophets. Sol88's cult prophets are insane because they spew out even more demented dogma when more information about comets is gathered and Sol88 swallow the dogma without even thinking! Look at the RSI insanity regurgitated by Sol88 from his cult.
We have an enormous body of physical evidence and real physics.

An insane "authors of mainstream paper canned by you" lie from Sol88.

Next post: Sol88's usual demented questions.
For others: The AMPTE experiment showed that neutral gases alone can stop the solar wind. A comet coma is neutral gases + some ionized gas + some dust (a dusty plasma). The neutral gas alone can stop the solar wind. The electric fields in a plasma should also play a role.
Sol88 insanity that there is a "magnetic cavity" in the AMPTE experiment that slows and deflects the solar wind.
Sol88's dementia is that asking about mainstream physics has anything to do with Sol88's demented dogma.

Next post: Sol88's own insane delusions mostly irrelevant to Sol88's demoted dogma.
Dust in the coma is not "mostly negative charge". Papers reported on negatively charged dust grains because that is interesting physics . Other papers report on negatively and positively charged dust!
Sol88persist in the insane delusion that any charges of dust detected in the coma applies to dust electrostatically lofted when there was no coma !
Sol88's insanity that a deluded ignorant person knows what a discharge is or even high school level science.
An electric discharge is a sudden current formed when a dialectic medium breaks down, e.g. lightning via the breakdown of air. There is no dielectric medium to break down at a comet. A comet is surrounded by vacuum outside the frost line. A comets is surrounded by the plasma of it's coma inside the frost line with neutral gases close to the nucleus (from sublimating ices).
Any lofting of charged dust from the surface of 67P during low activity before there was a coma would be called an electric current. That assumes that there is an overall charge which is unlikely. Remove negative charges from a neutral surface. The surface becomes positively charged, opposite charges attract and the lofting slows and stops!

[Reality Check]

Originally Posted by Sol88

...

The thousands of insane lies, delusions, insults, etc. since 6 July 2009 from Sol88 about his cult's electric comet and electric Sun dogma (updated 13 Feb 2020).

Sol88's usual insane lies about irrelevant mainstream science, his own ignorant delusions and demented questions.
On the ion-neutral coupling in cometary comae is real physics on real comets.
A possible mechanism for the formation of magnetic field dropouts in the coma of 67P/Churyumov–Gerasimenko is real physics on real comets.

Sol88's insane ignorance and lie that"kinetic theory for the plasma" is new.
There is no "kinetic theory" in Electron and Ion Dynamics of the Solar Wind Interaction with a Weakly Outgassing Comet. Deca , et. al. use the many decades old kinetic approach to modeling plasma. That should be the old particle-in-cell computer simulation that has been around since the 1950's.

Sol88 persists with his "Double layer" insanity when they are physically impossible at comets as stated by a plasma physicist studying comets. And obvious to people who bother to learn what a double layer is!

Sol88's insanity of "some sorta majic electrochemistry" when the electrochemistry of plasma is well understood.

A demented “fields do nothing” rant from jd116" lie from Sol88. No sign of that statement from jonesdave116.
Is another outright lie. Getting sick of this. Deca says nothing about the diamagnetic cavity. For anybody who can read, he is talking about the comet at low outgassing rates. When there is no DC!!!!

Sol88 insanely cites and lies about the the Ulysses probe. Ulysses primarily studied the solar environment and did not find the massive solar electric currents needed for Sol88's demented dogma. Ulysses flew by several comets. No massive electric fields reported!

Sol88 insanely lies that The charge state of electrostatically transported dust on regolith surfaces by J. Schwan X. Wang H.‐W. Hsu E. Grün M. Horányi has anything to so with Sol88's insane delusion that there is EDM on comets.

Sol88's insane delusion that his insane EDM delusion "forms and sustains the diamagnetic cavity".

Sol88's insane delusion that outgassing can be confides for his insane delusion and demented lie of "above discharging".

[jonesdave116]

Quote:

So as for the post above I’m throwing the charged dust leaving the nucleus as visually observed into this complicated mix of all sorts of fun stuff going on.

But back to Apossible mechanism for the formation of magnetic field dropouts in the coma of 67P/Churyumov–Gerasimenko

And cherry picking again,

Stop talking crap, you clown. Address the AMPTE results, quit lying. and actually get on with it, you serial liar.

[jonesdave116]

Quote:

I’m throwing the charged dust leaving the nucleus as visually observed into this complicated mix

Any chance that you can stop being an idiot for a while? Tell me where the dust was in the AMPTE experiment. You are lying again, aren't you? The only other possibility is that you are as thick as pigsh*t, and don't understand the papers. Which is it, you obfuscating, uneducated clown? Make your mind up. I am sick to death of your mindless crap, and interminable lying. Go away. You are a waste of oxygen.

[jonesdave116]

Quote:

Right, on neutral-ion friction, are Erik Vigren and Anders I. Eriksson paper Onthe ion-neutral coupling in cometary comae correct with there maths?

As well as quitting the lying, how about learning to spell, you clown? THEIR. OK?

[jonesdave116]

Quote:

along with the dust removing some of these electrons in “showers” of colimated accelerated dust, ultimately down the tail, in my thinking.

You are incapable of thinking. Leave it out. Where was the dust in the AMPTE experiments? Answer. Can't, can you? Now, why would that be? Due to being scientifically illiterate? Due to being a liar? A combination of both? Due to having a quasi-religious belief in the idiotic scribblings of uneducated clowns like Thornhill and Talbott?

Here is a thought; get a life, and get an education. And bugger off. Good advice? I think so. How about it?

[jonesdave116]

Quote:

So I’m placing some of my eggs in the basket of Deca’s new paper, using believe it or not, kinetic theory for the plasma. His papers a one of the few that actually treat the electrons with respect they deserve, along with the charged dust.

There was no charged dust in the AMPTE experiments!!! Are you incapable of reading? Seriously? Go away. You are a fool. A liar. An obfuscator. You are scientifically illiterate. You are a poser.
In short, the oxygen you breathe would be better used elsewhere.

[jonesdave116]

Quote:

Is close enough for me to EDM for the initial kick in the guts to get the rock into dust, charged and under the influence of some complicated electric fields including double layers. Discharging.

You are either lying (as usual), or just as dumb as a bag of spanners, if you think that is even close to scientifically impossible EDM in an astrophysical context. It might be close enough for you, but you are a bit stupid, as has already been proven.
Go to school, and leave the good people of this forum alone, while you attempt to educate yourself. A plan? I think so. Leave science alone. You are totally out of your depth. Stick to mythology. Or whatever other woo you believe in.

[jonesdave116]

Quote:

I think we are still confusing “outgassing” for the above discharging?

Yes, but you are scientifically illiterate. Where was this impossible discharging woo in the AMPTE experiments? Where is it in the mag data at Halley? Where is it in the mag data at 67P?
Give up. You are bloody clueless.

[jonesdave116]

Quote:

This “fields do nothing” rant from jd116, is difficult to understand when we have data from the Ulysses probe.

WTF are you talking about? Where is the 'field' in the AMPTE experiments? WTF is it doing? Seriously, you need to stop embarrassing yourself on here, and go join a woo forum. Get this through your head - you do not have the foggiest clue about any of the relevant science. Yes? Or any other science. You are merely wasting pixels, and posing for the non-existent lurkers that you imagine are looking in from your booksales website. That is it.
Scientifically speaking, you are on the same level as a brain damaged trilobite. And that is possibly being unkind to brain damaged trilobites. You are a joke. A complete laugh. Just like the idiots that invented this woo that you believe in. As dumb as a bag of spanners, the lot of you.

[Sol88]

Originally Posted by jonesdave116

Stop talking crap, you clown. Address the AMPTE results, quit lying. and actually get on with it, you serial liar.

Cometary PLASMA excludes the solar winds magnetic field.

AS had been shown, sublimation is not required.

I see you and Reality Check

Quote:

For others: The AMPTE experiment showed that neutral gases alone can stop the solar wind. A comet coma is neutral gases + some ionized gas + some dust (a dusty plasma). The neutral gas alone can stop the solar wind. The electric fields in a plasma should also play a role.

have trouble understanding this jd116. So just go easy and keep your blood pressure down.

No, the PLASMA and ELECTRIC FIELD stops the solar wind! No neutral gas at all!

[Reality Check]

Originally Posted by Sol88

...

Sol88's usual insanity emphasizing Sol88's demented dogma. The thousands of insane lies, delusions, insults, etc. since 6 July 2009 from Sol88 about his cult's electric comet and electric Sun dogma (updated 13 Feb 2020).

Sol88 persists in his insane lie that sublimation is not needed when sublimation is a physical fact for comets made of ices and dust. Ices on a comet will sublimate when the comet is inside the frost line. Sublimation is not needed for mainstream comets outside the frost line because sublimation does not happen there - that is the definition of the frost line ! That is where we can have mainstream electrostatic lofting of dust.

For others who are not deluded followers of a demented cult:

Originally Posted by Reality Check

Next post: Sol88's usual demented questions.
For others: The AMPTE experiment showed that neutral gases alone can stop the solar wind. A comet coma is neutral gases + some ionized gas + some dust (a dusty plasma). The neutral gas alone can stop the solar wind. The electric fields in a plasma should also play a role.
Sol88 insanity that there is a "magnetic cavity" in the AMPTE experiment that slows and deflects the solar wind.
Sol88's dementia is that asking about mainstream physics has anything to do with Sol88's demented dogma.!

jonesdave116:
You have already been told this, you liar. Refer to the AMPTE experiments. As I linked not more than a handful of posts back. No comet. No rock. Just gas.
Liar. Tusenfem did no such thing, you lying POS. I asked you to explain the AMPTE experiments, you lying, obfuscating clown. Would you please get on with it?

Originally Posted by jonesdave116

...Dynamics of the AMPTE artificial comet
Haerendel, G. et al (1986)
https://www.researchgate.net/profile...1430c807cf.pdf

Therefore, this has been common knowledge to all who have an interest in the subject of comets, for nearly three and a half decades. Plenty of time for it to have sunk in, one would have thought.

Reading the PDF shows I made a mistake - the gases in the AMPTE experiment were a plasma and thus not totally neutral and the strikeout above.
Reading the PDF suggests more insanity from Sol88 who used the "magnetic cavity" phrase presumably from that paper. But we get ignorant delusions about the AMPTE experiment as if Sol88 had no idea what it was!

Sol88's usual insane lies about science with "No neutral gas at all!". Plasma is generally is mostly neutral gas! Any one with 2 brain cells can read that even "fully ionized" plasma has neutral atoms with a "degree of ionization as low as 0.01%". If Sol88 were rational, I would research the actual degree of ionization for cometary comae.

[Sol88]

Originally Posted by jonesdave116

WTF are you talking about? Where is the 'field' in the AMPTE experiments? WTF is it doing? Seriously, you need to stop embarrassing yourself on here, and go join a woo forum. Get this through your head - you do not have the foggiest clue about any of the relevant science. Yes? Or any other science. You are merely wasting pixels, and posing for the non-existent lurkers that you imagine are looking in from your booksales website. That is it.
Scientifically speaking, you are on the same level as a brain damaged trilobite. And that is possibly being unkind to brain damaged trilobites. You are a joke. A complete laugh. Just like the idiots that invented this woo that you believe in. As dumb as a bag of spanners, the lot of you.

We are reading the same paper?

Dynamics of the AMPTE artificial comet Haerendel, G.; Paschmann, G.; Baumjohann, W.; Carlson, C. W.

Assuming so,

Quote:

Sweeping the plasma before it, the interplanetary magnetic field quickly penetrated into an initially diamagnetic barium plasma cloud. The field was strongly compressed and extended in the flow direction. Ions accelerated by electric polarization fields formed a visible tail at the rear of the cloud; their recoil balancing the magnetic stresses. The dominant lateral motion of the head of the artificial comet is attributed to a recoil of ions extracted by the interplanetary electric field.

So, plasma for a start not neutral Barium gas.

[Sol88]

Originally Posted by Reality Check

For others who are not deluded followers of a demented cult:



Reading the PDF shows I made a mistake - the gases in the AMPTE experiment were a plasma and thus not totally neutral and the strikeout above.
Reading the PDF suggests more insanity from Sol88 who used the "magnetic cavity" phrase presumably from that paper. But we get ignorant delusions about the AMPTE experiment as if Sol88 had no idea what it was!

Sol88's usual insane lies about science with "No neutral gas at all!". Plasma is generally is mostly neutral gas! Any one with 2 brain cells can read that even "fully ionized" plasma has neutral atoms with a "degree of ionization as low as 0.01%". If Sol88 were rational, I would research the actual degree of ionization for cometary comae.

That's ok mate we all make mistakes. Thank you for correcting it.

Will jd116 agree with you?

as for the other part, WTAF???

Plasma may contain neutrals but the neutral gas contains no plasma! FFS

Maybe have a crack at Recalling and Updating Research on Diamagnetic Cavities: Experiments, Theory, Simulations Dan Winske1*, Joseph D. Huba2, Christoph Niemann3 and Ari Le1

[jonesdave116]

Originally Posted by Sol88

We are reading the same paper?

Dynamics of the AMPTE artificial comet Haerendel, G.; Paschmann, G.; Baumjohann, W.; Carlson, C. W.

Assuming so,

So, plasma for a start not neutral Barium gas.

Christ, does your ignorance and lack of comprehension know no bounds? What did I say about the Ba gas? That it quickly becomes photo-ionised, yes? So quit lying about what I said, or I'll paste the whole comment again. And how the hell would neutral gas mass load the solar wind? Duh!
You need to learn to read. A diamagnetic cavity was formed, as predicted, by nothing more than gas. No comet. No rock. No discharge woo. Just gas. Just as we see at comets. Which renders all of your unscientific ramblings as moot, yes?

[jonesdave116]

Originally Posted by Sol88

Cometary PLASMA excludes the solar winds magnetic field.

AS had been shown, sublimation is not required.

I see you and Reality Check have trouble understanding this jd116. So just go easy and keep your blood pressure down.

No, the PLASMA and ELECTRIC FIELD stops the solar wind! No neutral gas at all!

Sublimation is required you fool, otherwise there is no plasma! Seriously, just give up. Comprehension is not your strong point. And an electric field cannot stop the solar wind. Stop being stupid. And where is your electric field coming from without sublimation? Which is observed to happen.
Sorry, but your scientifically impossible woo was dead on its arse 20 years before the clowns who dreamed it up actually bothered to write it down!

[jonesdave116]

Originally Posted by Sol88

Discharging in context of a charged rocky body.

Well one of my main mechanism was the removal of charge, mostly in the form of the dust and there mostly negative charge. We observe these fluffy clusters Of charged dust arrive in showers and bursts by GIADA. This dust is also effected by Rosetta’s charge.

We established a few pages ago, the negatively charged dust that also appears to be positive further from the nucleus, should respond the the electric fields, electric currents as described in a quite a few linked papers by great scientists.

So the comet seems to trade mass to try and reach some potential balance with the surrounding plasma, the solar wind.

I’m calling this a discharge in the overall picture of a comets AND asteroids.


Nothing wrong at all with Deca’s paper and others. I was all excited of course because there was the charge seperation in a mainstream paper with maths and all.

So not sure how I could prove it to you though.

Unscientific gibberish. Why is this not happening at asteroids? And why does it need to reach a balance? A balance with what? The solar wind is quasi-neutral. Like I said, you need to leave science alone. It really isn't your strong point. Oh, and there shouldn't be any dust in your woo. Thornhill said so.