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 7th April 2020, 02:10 PM   #1881
jonesdave116
Philosopher
 
jonesdave116's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Posts: 5,170
Quote:
Rock, charged dust and double layers!
No rock, no double layers, no EDM (lol), no discharges. Continually lying about such things is not going to change the data. Your woo failed 100%. Now, why don't you go away and pollute somewhere else with your scientifically impossible fairy tales?
__________________
“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 7th April 2020, 02:12 PM   #1882
jonesdave116
Philosopher
 
jonesdave116's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Posts: 5,170
Originally Posted by Sol88 View Post
So, as I've been saying since day one, there IS charge separation at comets.


Is there a spatial separation of + and - in play at comets tusenfem?

Will you answer for the lurkers if the last question was just too hard?
The question has been answered, and is a total irrelevance to your failed woo. Quasi-neutrality is MAINTAINED. And any small scale charge separation is going to do nothing to explain the complete failure of your woo.
__________________
“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 7th April 2020, 02:22 PM   #1883
jonesdave116
Philosopher
 
jonesdave116's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Posts: 5,170
Originally Posted by Sol88 View Post
The rocky-like behavior of cometary landslides on 67P/Churyumov-Gerasimenko

LIAR.

How many times do your lies need to be pointed out before you stop lying? It is pathetic. I have quoted a goodly percentage of that paper saying that it isn't rock, not to mention other papers involving the same authors pointing out that the material is nothing like rock. Your pathetic lies do not change the evidence. And evidence is something you completely lack;

Once again, for the hard of reading, pathological liars amongst us;

Quote:
Abstract:

The variability of the runout length among 67P landslides can be attributed to the different volatile content located in the top few meters of the cometary crust, which can drive the mass movement.

Plain language summary:

In addition, the considerable variability among the different landslides of 67P suggests that different volatile contents located in the top few meters of the cometary crust play a fundamental role on mass movement, hence being a general indicator for the subsurface cometary heterogeneities.

Section 3:

This analysis suggests that the falling icy material constituting the comet is characterized by a mechanical behavior that is not comparable to the collapsed ice on other bodies.

Section 4.1:

This is clearly not enough to heat the ice (making it slippery or melting it, as in Iapetus case) and consequently decrease the friction of the collapsed mass. In summary, the apparent friction coefficients on 67P derived from this analysis are comparable to landslides characterizing water ice in the absence of frictional heating.

All these results make 67P a very peculiar object, mainly composed by ices and refractory materials, but characterized by rocky-type properties rather than icy-type characteristics. The rocky-type behavior we highlight with this work does not mean that the material constituting comet 67P is dense as rock, as the mean bulk density of 537.8 kg m-3 points out.

Section 4.2. Implication for Different Volatile Content in 67P:

We therefore suggest that the range of H/L values of 67P (between 0.50 and 0.97) can be explained by variations in the volatile content within the top few meters of the comet surface.

The different morphologies observed on 67P are hypothesized to be the result of regional to local variations of the volatile content (Vincent et al., 2015), differently processed by the diurnal and seasonal insolation
changes while approaching perihelion. Our observations support this interpretation, suggesting that different H/L values of landslides on 67P can be expression of different volatile contents within the collapsed material. Indeed, volatiles that are released by sublimating cliffs during the gravitational event might facilitate longer landslides runouts length trough overpressure at the sliding surface.

Therefore, we indicate that lower values of H/L are representative of a higher concentration of volatile translating in longer landslides runouts, while higher H/L values reflect a smaller content of volatiles hence resulting in shorter landslide runouts. These values imply that for comets, different H/L values can be used as an indicator of the different localized volatile content that fosters the material to slide nearer or farther from the scarp face.

Conclusion:

This behavior agrees with the refractory to ice ratio estimated from grains ejected from 67P (Fulle et al., 2019). In addition, the considerable variability of H/L values among the different landslides suggests that different volatile contents of the detached mass play a fundamental role on the gravitational process and final runout, hence being a general indicator for the subsurface cometary heterogeneities.
So, quit with the pathetic lying because we can all read, and see for ourselves, that you are 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

Last edited by jonesdave116; 7th April 2020 at 02:30 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 7th April 2020, 02:27 PM   #1884
jonesdave116
Philosopher
 
jonesdave116's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Posts: 5,170
Originally Posted by Sol88 View Post
The comet is losing MASS and CHARGE via the process's above!

That IS the ELECTRIC COMET!
What charge? How are you explaining the mass loss? What 'electric comet'? You have no science, no mechanisms and no evidence. Nobody should be surprised at this, given that it was the brainchild of Velikovskian clowns with no knowledge of any relevant science. And was already dead 20 years before it was born.
__________________
“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 7th April 2020, 03:20 PM   #1885
Reality Check
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: New Zealand
Posts: 28,460
Arrow The usual insane lies, delusions, insults, etc. addressed since 6 July 2009

Originally Posted by Sol88 View Post
...
Sol88 shows how deep his decades of insanity is yet again.
The thousands of insane lies, delusions, insults, etc. since 6 July 2009 from Sol88 about his cult's electric comet and electric Sun dogma.
Most of the recent insanity from Sol88

This post: His usual irrelevant rant about physically impossible double layers at comets.
Usual insane lie that quotes not mentioning DLs are about DLs.

Next post: Usual irrelevant insanity about the mainstream electrostatic transport of dust on airless bodies.
The charge state of electrostatically transported dust on regolith surfaces is about bodies with regolith (deposits on top of solid rock) such as the Moon. The word comet appears once because electrostatic transport of dust is thought to be a mechanism for accumulating dust in craters on 67P.
Thomas, N., et al. (2015), Redistribution of particles across the nucleus of comet 67P/Churyumov‐Gerasimenko, Astron. Astrophys., 583, A17, doi:10.1051/0004‐6361/201526049.
This emphasizes yet again Sol88's insanity about his cult's demented dogma which has nothing about electrostatic transport of dust.

Sol88's usual lies about posts and posters including himself and his posts !
No one, including Sol88, has asked for a mechanism to put dust in 67P's crater !
jonesdave116 has frequently pointed out that Sol88 and his demented cult have no mechanisms behind their delusions. An example is their imaginary electric discharges between the Sun and comets magically produce comet coma somehow. If they were not a demented cult,they would cite the science and experiments on electric discharges on planetary rock. They would show that they produce the neutral gas, ins, electrons and dust that we detect at comets.
No science, no mechanisms, no evidence. 'Twas ever thus with you clowns.

Next post: As usual he lies about tusenfem's post which does not mention charge separation.
tusenfem wrote If you would comprehensively read the whole paper, and not only tha abstract, I am sure that Andrey explains it somewhere. ...
Demented questions when tusenfem wrote "I am not here to do your work for you, and anyway, any explanation that I would give, that would not fit into your mindset, would be discarded. So why bother? (and no, do not come with the lame argument of it being for "the lurkers")"

Next post: Persists in the years long insanity of citing mainstream ices and dust comet papers irrelevant to his demented dogma.
The rocky-like behavior of cometary landslides on 67P/Churyumov-Gerasimenko

Next post: Usual lies about comets and his cult's demented dogma.
Comets obviously loose MASS because we see the gas, ions, electrons and duct that they lose from ices sublimating, etc. in the coma and tails!
An obvious "and CHARGE via the process's above" because none of the "processes above" say that comets have or lose charge! The solar wind is neutral. It cannot charge a comet with respect to say the Sun. Before a coma forms to shield a comet from the solar wind, the neutral solar wind interacts with a neutral ice and dust grain surface. Some grains pick up say electrons from the solar wind. Like charges repel - the grains will be lifted from the surface and drift elsewhere. That is roughly electrostatic transport.

ETA
Next post: Usual insane lies about science
Insane because the Fulle et. all. paper is about 67P (not all comets), CI-chondrites (not all asteroids), hydration (water ice is not water bound in minerals) and most importantly is mainstream ices and dust cometary science irrelevant to his cult's demented dogma.
Insane because no paper ever published has said that comets are the rock in Sol88's demented dogma (solid terrestrial type rock such as basalt, granite, limestone, etc.).

Next post: Usual insane lies about science and the insanity of physically impossible double layers at comets.
His persistent insanity of "quoting" from a mainstream ices and dust comet paper and delusions about what he quotes.
"To constrain the mechanism responsible for the anisotropic electron heating present in the latter region, we introduce an effective acceleration (ambipolar) potential (Egedal et al. 2008, 2010), ΦP,defined by the integral" is about electron heating !

Last edited by Reality Check; 7th April 2020 at 05:17 PM. Reason: Added his post with yet more lies about science
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 7th April 2020, 04:14 PM   #1886
Sol88
Philosopher
 
Sol88's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 6,593
Originally Posted by jonesdave116 View Post
LIAR.

How many times do your lies need to be pointed out before you stop lying? It is pathetic. I have quoted a goodly percentage of that paper saying that it isn't rock, not to mention other papers involving the same authors pointing out that the material is nothing like rock. Your pathetic lies do not change the evidence. And evidence is something you completely lack;

Once again, for the hard of reading, pathological liars amongst us;



So, quit with the pathetic lying because we can all read, and see for ourselves, that you are lying.

What a complete numpty!

Quote:
Conclusion:

This behavior agrees with the refractory to ice ratio estimated from grains ejected from 67P (Fulle et al., 2019). In addition, the considerable variability of H/L values among the different landslides suggests that different volatile contents of the detached mass play a fundamental role on the gravitational process and final runout, hence being a general indicator for the subsurface cometary heterogeneities.
What did Fulle say...
Quote:
We review the Refractory-to-Ice mass ratios available for the comet nuclei visited by space missions, and for the Kuiper Belt Objects with well defined bulk density, finding the 1-σ lower limit of 3. Therefore, comets and KBOs may have less water than CI-chondrites, as predicted by models of comet formation by the gravitational collapse of cm-sized pebbles driven by streaming instabilities in the protoplanetary disc.
The Refractory-to-Ice Mass Ratio in Comets

So... your dummy spit is actually quite funny.


So, yeah, both papers agreed, comets are ROCK!
__________________
“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 7th April 2020, 04:17 PM   #1887
Sol88
Philosopher
 
Sol88's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 6,593
Oi, jonesdave116, To constrain the mechanism responsible for the anisotropic electron heating present in the latter region, we introduce an effective acceleration (ambipolar) potential (Egedal et al. 2008, 2010), ΦP,defined by the integral

Booya, double layers at a rocky comet!
__________________
“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 7th April 2020, 04:24 PM   #1888
jonesdave116
Philosopher
 
jonesdave116's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Posts: 5,170
Originally Posted by Sol88 View Post
Oi, jonesdave116, To constrain the mechanism responsible for the anisotropic electron heating present in the latter region, we introduce an effective acceleration (ambipolar) potential (Egedal et al. 2008, 2010), ΦP,defined by the integral

Booya, double layers at a rocky comet!
It says absolutely nothing about anything that even resembles double layers. You do not understand the first thing about any of the relevant science. You have no discharges and no rock. That is your woo finished. As of 1986. Fail.
__________________
“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 7th April 2020, 04:26 PM   #1889
jonesdave116
Philosopher
 
jonesdave116's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Posts: 5,170
Originally Posted by Sol88 View Post
What a complete numpty!



What did Fulle say... The Refractory-to-Ice Mass Ratio in Comets

So... your dummy spit is actually quite funny.


So, yeah, both papers agreed, comets are ROCK!
LIAR.

Not a single paper on comets has ever said thay are rock. No detections. You are a pathological LIAR.
__________________
“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 7th April 2020, 05:31 PM   #1890
Reality Check
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: New Zealand
Posts: 28,460
Exclamation An insane lie that a quote about electron heating is about double layers

Originally Posted by Sol88 View Post
...
An insane lie that a quote about electron heating is about double layers.
A lie because there are no double layers in "To constrain the mechanism responsible for the anisotropic electron heating present in the latter region, we introduce an effective acceleration (ambipolar) potential (Egedal et al. 2008, 2010), ΦP,defined by the integral".
Insane because he highlights "effective acceleration (ambipolar) potential " which is not a double layer.
Insane because double layers are physically impossible at comets as tusenfem who has published papers on comets has told him several times,
Insane because any "evidence" Sol88 has presented just shows that he lies about plasma and double layers. He ranted about measurements over many kilometers when any hypothetical DLs at comets would be metres in scale.
Insane because Sol88's demented dogma has no double layers !
Insane because he does not cite which mainstream ices and dust comet paper that quote comes from.
Insane because he has decades of displays of an insane level of ignorance, lies, delusions, insults, etc. since 6 July 2009 . Just about everything he writes about science is a delusion based his abysmally ignorant belief in a demented dogma.

The paper is probably A Fully Kinetic Perspective of Electron Acceleration around a Weakly Outgassing Comet which Sol88 has been obsessively lying about recently.
Quote:
The cometary mission Rosetta has shown the presence of higher-than-expected suprathermal electron fluxes. In this study, using 3D fully kinetic electromagnetic simulations of the interaction of the solar wind with a comet, we constrain the kinetic mechanism that is responsible for the bulk electron energization that creates the suprathermal distribution from the warm background of solar wind electrons. We identify and characterize the magnetic field-aligned ambipolar electric field that ensures quasi-neutrality and traps warm electrons. Solar wind electrons are accelerated to energies as high as 50─70 eV close to the comet nucleus without the need for wave─particle or turbulent heating mechanisms. We find that the accelerating potential controls the parallel electron temperature, total density, and (to a lesser degree) the perpendicular electron temperature and the magnetic field magnitude. Our self-consistent approach enables us to better understand the underlying plasma processes that govern the near-comet plasma environment.
With references to
Cause of super-thermal electron heating during magnetotail reconnection (2010) by Egedal, J.; Lę, A.; Zhu, Y. and 5 more.
Evidence and theory for trapped electrons in guide field magnetotail reconnection (2008) by Egedal, J.; Fox, W.; Katz, N. and 5 more.
The paper seems paywalled which suggests Sol88 is so determined to spew out lie that he pays to quote mine a paper to lie about!

Last edited by Reality Check; 7th April 2020 at 05:48 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 7th April 2020, 06:45 PM   #1891
Sol88
Philosopher
 
Sol88's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 6,593
Originally Posted by jonesdave116 View Post
LIAR.

Not a single paper on comets has ever said thay are rock. No detections. You are a pathological LIAR.
Learn to spell!
__________________
“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 7th April 2020, 07:00 PM   #1892
Sol88
Philosopher
 
Sol88's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 6,593
Quote:
Given that the 67P high friction coefficients are comparable, or even exceed, those found on Earth dry landslides (Legros, 2002), this implies a mechanically rocky-type behaviour for the cometary material.

Our findings reject the idea that comets are fluffy aggregates, instead, they are characterised by consolidated surfaces.


Landslides on 67P reveal a clear rocky-type behaviour for cometary material that, once collapsed, assumes a rock avalanche mobilization associated to relatively high friction coefficients. This behaviour agrees with the refractory to ice ratio estimated from grains ejected from 67P (Fulle et al., 2019). In
The rocky-like behavior of cometary landslides on 67P/Churyumov-Gerasimenko including Marco Fulle!

The Refractory-to-Ice Mass Ratio in Comets Marco Fulle et al

Quote:
Therefore, comets and KBOs may have less water than CI-chondrites, as predicted by models of comet formation by the gravitational collapse of cm-sized pebbles driven by streaming instabilities in the protoplanetary disc.
The rocky-like behavior of cometary landslides on 67P/Churyumov-Gerasimenko

I had asked YOU jonesdave116 which has more water comets or asteroids!

The rock detected at Tempel 1 and Wild 2 not enough for you?

Perhaps Patzold assertion of
Quote:
The nucleus is thus a highly porous very dusty body with very little ice.
The Nucleus of comet 67P/Churyumov–Gerasimenko – Part I: The global view – nucleus mass, mass-loss, porosity, and implications Part 1

Grow up 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 7th April 2020, 07:05 PM   #1893
Sol88
Philosopher
 
Sol88's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 6,593
Originally Posted by jonesdave116 View Post
It says absolutely nothing about anything that even resembles double layers. You do not understand the first thing about any of the relevant science. You have no discharges and no rock. That is your woo finished. As of 1986. Fail.
From someone that gave up on plasma physics 'cos the maths was too hard???

Cometary double layers and more than probable, stair step double layers!

As seen in SAFIRE!

Even tusenfem will not help you here champ! Well not explain to you
Quote:
mechanism responsible for the anisotropic
electron heating
but still, there it is!


PLASMA DOUBLE LAYERS!
__________________
“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 7th April 2020, 07:10 PM   #1894
Reality Check
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: New Zealand
Posts: 28,460
Originally Posted by Sol88 View Post
...
Sol88 shows how deep his decades of insanity is yet again.
The thousands of insane lies, delusions, insults, etc. since 6 July 2009 from Sol88 about his cult's electric comet and electric Sun dogma.
Most of the recent insanity from Sol88

This post: jonesdave116 stated the obvious fact that Sol88 has been persistently lying in his posts about the mainstream ice and dust comet papers he has been citing.
Just citing them is a lie because they are irrelevant to his demented dogma that comets are actual rock blasted from rocky planets, etc. Lying about their contents is insane because we can read the papers !

Next post: Repeats demented question, insane lie that rock detected at Tempel 1 and Wild 2, and insanity of quoting and ling about the mainstream ice and dust comet paper by Patzold et.al.

Next post: His personal double layer insanity. DLs are physically impossible at comets and not part of his demented cult's dogma.

Last edited by Reality Check; 7th April 2020 at 07:13 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 7th April 2020, 07:23 PM   #1895
Reality Check
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: New Zealand
Posts: 28,460
Exclamation A lie that jonesdave116 "gave up on plasma physics 'cos the maths was too hard"

Originally Posted by Sol88 View Post
From someone that gave up on plasma physics 'cos the maths was too hard???
A lie that jonesdave116 "gave up on plasma physics 'cos the maths was too hard???"

jonesdave116 wrote It says absolutely nothing about anything that even resembles double layers. You do not understand the first thing about any of the relevant science. You have no discharges and no rock. That is your woo finished. As of 1986. Fail.
jonesdave116 does not state there and has never stated that he gave up on plasma physics for any reason.
If there are no double layers in a quote then the quote is not about double layers and Sol88 is lying. If there are no double layers in a paper then the paper is not about double layers and Sol88 is lying.
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 7th April 2020, 07:30 PM   #1896
Reality Check
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: New Zealand
Posts: 28,460
Exclamation An insane lie about SAFIRE (a deluded model of the Sun)

Originally Posted by Sol88 View Post
...As seen in SAFIRE!
An insane lie that SAFIRE (a deluded model of the Sun as basically a plasma globe that turns the Sun into a white dwarf!) is a model of comets.
The SAFIRE cranks who are now touting a "free energy" scam imagined that striations in the plasma were double layers.

Sol88 has the blatant and personal delusion that comets must have double layers. That is deluded because it is physically improbable. It is his own personal delusion because it is not in his demented cult's comet dogma that he has been spewing obvious lies about for years. Now he is lying abut the SAFIRE insanity!

ETA: To be more exact, it is his cult's demented comet dogma itself that has no double layers in it. The deluded followers of the cults do have ignorant fairly tales about double layers.
From 2014: Sol88 cites a prime example of Thunderbolts ignorance and fantasies
Quote:
For those new to the thread - Thunderbolts are a bunch of science cranks who are so deluded that they know that the average density of comets is 0.6 g/cc and the average density of asteroids is 3.0 g/cc and still insist that comets are rocks.
Haig and Sol88 have been totally fooled by this group - see Sol88's many posts about ROCK despite knowing about the 0.6 versus 3.0 fact for over 5 years!
This is about a 2006 Thunderbolts article with their usual litany of lies and delusions which has a fantasy about plasma sheaths and double layers. The cult's usual stupidity of a fairy story with no citations of scientific literature. There is the same insane ignorance about plasma and DL's we see from Sol88. They imagine DLs on scales of thousands of kilometers when any hypothetical DLs would have scales of metres. They imagine that any variation in ions/voltage/etc. is a DL when DL's have a specific variation in ions/voltage/etc. The main insanity is the same as Sol88's - denying the textbook physics that DL's need conditions that do not exist at comets. DL's cannot exist when there are turbulent magnetic fields as in the chaotic interaction of the solar wind with a comet coma. As far as I know, ditto for physical turbulence.

We get actual insanity about DL's from the cult prophets. Wal Thornhill was a physicist maybe 40 years ago and should know what plasma and DL's are. But we get ignorant gibberish and delusions from him at Langmuir’s Bubbles.
This is the real heliopause. Thornhill has a delusion that it is spherical. That is impossible because the Sun moves! The solar wind is slower on one side than the other and thus will be stopped by the interstellar medium at different distances. The physical evidence is obvious - Voyager 1 met the heliopause at 121 AU, Voyager 2 reached interstellar space on November 5, 2018 when it was at less than 120 AU.
Voyager 2 Illuminates Boundary of Interstellar Space
A probable and irrelevant lie of "unusual events" for Voyager 1 as it got to the heliopause.
Idiotic gibberish about a dark mode electric discharge, etc. His electric sun insanity that turns the Sun into a white dwarf and makes us not exist !
A "isolate the Sun’s plasma from the ISM" lie. What happens is that the heliopause is where solar wind comes to a stop within the ISM. The termination shock (mentioned at the start of this deluded article!) many AU inside the heliopause is where the solar wind slows to subsonic speeds because it interacts with the ISM.

Last edited by Reality Check; 7th April 2020 at 08:30 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 7th April 2020, 09:43 PM   #1897
Sol88
Philosopher
 
Sol88's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 6,593
Originally Posted by Reality Check View Post
Sol88 shows how deep his decades of insanity is yet again.
The thousands of insane lies, delusions, insults, etc. since 6 July 2009 from Sol88 about his cult's electric comet and electric Sun dogma.
Most of the recent insanity from Sol88

This post: jonesdave116 stated the obvious fact that Sol88 has been persistently lying in his posts about the mainstream ice and dust comet papers he has been citing.
Just citing them is a lie because they are irrelevant to his demented dogma that comets are actual rock blasted from rocky planets, etc. Lying about their contents is insane because we can read the papers !

Next post: Repeats demented question, insane lie that rock detected at Tempel 1 and Wild 2, and insanity of quoting and ling about the mainstream ice and dust comet paper by Patzold et.al.

Next post: His personal double layer insanity. DLs are physically impossible at comets and not part of his demented cult's dogma.
DLs (Plasma Double Layers) are physically impossible at comets [/b].

Why, Reality Check?
__________________
“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 7th April 2020, 09:57 PM   #1898
Sol88
Philosopher
 
Sol88's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 6,593
Originally Posted by Reality Check View Post
Sol88 shows how deep his decades of insanity is yet again.
The thousands of insane lies, delusions, insults, etc. since 6 July 2009 from Sol88 about his cult's electric comet and electric Sun dogma.
Most of the recent insanity from Sol88

This post: jonesdave116 stated the obvious fact that Sol88 has been persistently lying in his posts about the mainstream ice and dust comet papers he has been citing.
Just citing them is a lie because they are irrelevant to his demented dogma that comets are actual rock blasted from rocky planets, etc. Lying about their contents is insane because we can read the papers !

Next post: Repeats demented question, insane lie that rock detected at Tempel 1 and Wild 2, and insanity of quoting and ling about the mainstream ice and dust comet paper by Patzold et.al.

Next post: His personal double layer insanity. DLs are physically impossible at comets and not part of his demented cult's dogma.

jonesdave116 stated the obvious fact that Sol88 has been persistently lying in his posts about the mainstream ice and dust MOSTLY ROCKY comet papers he has been citing.

Just citing them is a lie because they are irrelevant to his demented dogma that comets are actual rock blasted from rocky planets, etc. Lying about their contents is insane because we can read the papers !

Can you read this paper, reality check?

The Refractory-to-Ice Mass Ratio in Comets

Quote:
ABSTRACT

We review the complex relationship between the dust-to-gas mass ratio usually estimated in the material lost by comets, and the Refractory-to-Ice mass ratio inside the nucleus, which constrains the origin of comets.

Such a relationship is dominated by the mass transfer from the perihelion erosion to fallout over most of the nucleus surface.

This makes the Refractory-to-Ice mass ratio inside the nucleus up to ten times larger than the dust-to-gas mass ratio in the lost material, because the lost material is missing most of the refractories which were inside the pristine nucleus before the erosion.

We review the Refractory-to-Ice mass ratios available for the comet nuclei visited by space missions, and for the Kuiper Belt Objects with well defined bulk density,

Finding the 1-. lower limit of 3.

Therefore, comets and KBOs may have less water than CI-chondrites, as predicted by models of comet formation by the gravitational collapse of cm-sized pebbles driven by streaming instabilities in the protoplanetary disc.

Which has more water reality check, asteroid/meteorites or dirtysnowballs?

You do actually read the papers I'm posting on, don't you?
__________________
“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 8th April 2020, 12:42 AM   #1899
tusenfem
Master Poster
 
tusenfem's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 2,975
Originally Posted by Sol88 View Post
tusenfem knows, of course he does, he a smart cookie!
Oh, yes, so very smart.

Every double layer is an electric field, not every electric field is a double layer.
__________________
Scientific progress goes *BOINK* -- Calvin & Hobbes
twitter: @tusenfem -- Super Duper Space Plasma Physicist
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 8th April 2020, 12:44 AM   #1900
tusenfem
Master Poster
 
tusenfem's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 2,975
Originally Posted by Sol88 View Post
Simultaneous Observation of Negatively and
Positively Charged Nanograins at Comet 67P/Churyumov‐Gerasimenko
This greatly undermines your "theory" that the dust is pulled from the surface by your "double layer". How can one electric field accelerate both positively and negatively charged dust from the surface?
__________________
Scientific progress goes *BOINK* -- Calvin & Hobbes
twitter: @tusenfem -- Super Duper Space Plasma Physicist
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 8th April 2020, 12:46 AM   #1901
tusenfem
Master Poster
 
tusenfem's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 2,975
Originally Posted by Sol88 View Post
So, as I've been saying since day one, there IS charge separation at comets.
Yes, you have been saying it.

Originally Posted by Sol88 View Post
Will you answer for the lurkers if the last question was just too hard?
I might try an answer, if the lurkers would ask me to.
__________________
Scientific progress goes *BOINK* -- Calvin & Hobbes
twitter: @tusenfem -- Super Duper Space Plasma Physicist
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 8th April 2020, 12:55 AM   #1902
Sol88
Philosopher
 
Sol88's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 6,593
Originally Posted by tusenfem View Post
Oh, yes, so very smart.

Every double layer is an electric field, not every electric field is a double layer.
But in this case a magnetic field aligned ambipolar electric field is a double layer!


This configuration is NON turbulent!

This is a DOUBLE LAYER.

How many garden variety ELECTRIC FIELDS are in play at a comet at any one time?

I think we are up to about 4 or 5 now.
__________________
“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 8th April 2020, 01:00 AM   #1903
Sol88
Philosopher
 
Sol88's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 6,593
Originally Posted by tusenfem View Post
Yes, you have been saying it.



I might try an answer, if the lurkers would ask me to.
Confirmed by peer reviewed scientist, like yourself.

Charge Separation, Electric Currents, Electric Fields

Ahhh... the good 'ol days of arguing over whether they're real or not.

Well glad we are all reading from the same page now, though.

Cheers Deca et al
__________________
“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 8th April 2020, 01:04 AM   #1904
Sol88
Philosopher
 
Sol88's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 6,593
Originally Posted by tusenfem View Post
This greatly undermines your "theory" that the dust is pulled from the surface by your "double layer". How can one electric field accelerate both positively and negatively charged dust from the surface?
Ummm... no it does not.

It actual mean YOU (mainstream) are dealing with a complex dusty plasma.

Geez, thought we sent you too school for learnin's.


Are ions being accelerated away from a comet? Are electrons being accelerated away from the nucleus?

How?

Not by dust drag/friction that's for sure!
__________________
“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; 8th April 2020 at 01:07 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 8th April 2020, 01:11 AM   #1905
Sol88
Philosopher
 
Sol88's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 6,593
since ya around tusenfem and since your "in the game", what is your take on this...

Quote:
Given that the 67P high friction coefficients are comparable, or even exceed, those found on Earth dry landslides (Legros, 2002), this implies a mechanically rocky-type behaviour for the cometary material.

Our findings reject the idea that comets are fluffy aggregates, instead, they are characterised by consolidated surfaces.
The rocky-like behavior of cometary landslides on 67P/Churyumov-Gerasimenko

Keep quite on that one because it's not your discipline to tell them they are wrong?
__________________
“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 8th April 2020, 01:18 AM   #1906
jonesdave116
Philosopher
 
jonesdave116's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Posts: 5,170
Originally Posted by Sol88 View Post
since ya around tusenfem and since your "in the game", what is your take on this...

The rocky-like behavior of cometary landslides on 67P/Churyumov-Gerasimenko

Keep quite on that one because it's not your discipline to tell them they are wrong?
Errrm, we already knew this. Did you not read the Philae papers back in 2015? About the consolidated surface? About the top metre or so being considerably harder than the interior? Backed up by the permittivity results? How many times are we going to have to keep linking to these things before it penetrates whatever it is that counts for your brain?
What is exposed when a landslide is observed? Ice. What is seen on the 'boulders' in the talus? Ice. What is the strength of the material to allow it to collapse in the first place? How much real science does it need before you realise that lying and obfuscating simply are not going to cut it?
Give up. It is pathetic.
__________________
“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 8th April 2020, 01:20 AM   #1907
jonesdave116
Philosopher
 
jonesdave116's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Posts: 5,170
Originally Posted by Sol88 View Post
Ummm... no it does not.

It actual mean YOU (mainstream) are dealing with a complex dusty plasma.

Geez, thought we sent you too school for learnin's.


Are ions being accelerated away from a comet? Are electrons being accelerated away from the nucleus?

How?

Not by dust drag/friction that's for sure!
Lol. How much is it possible to fail to understand some fairly straightforward papers? Give up Sol. Science is not your strong point. Stick to mythology-based woo. It seems to be your limit.
__________________
“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 8th April 2020, 01:23 AM   #1908
Sol88
Philosopher
 
Sol88's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 6,593
Well i'd call you a liar but you are actualy just misinfomred poor indoctinated soul.

I do feel sorry for people like you.

Quote:
Given that the 67P high friction coefficients are
comparable, or even exceed, those found on Earth dry landslides (Legros, 2002), this implies a mechanically rocky-type behaviour for the cometary material
Not BLOODY AVALANCHES.

DRY ROCKY landslides!

We can go all day at this if you like but it was based on the finding of the The Refractory-to-Ice Mass Ratio in Comets that found
Quote:
Therefore, comets and KBOs may have less water than CI-chondrites, as predicted by models of comet formation by the gravitational collapse of cm-sized pebbles driven by streaming instabilities in the protoplanetary disc.

Ahhh....my 'ol mate MUPUS. It hit ROCK.
So boo hoo, soak it up buttercup!
__________________
“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; 8th April 2020 at 01:24 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 8th April 2020, 01:24 AM   #1909
jonesdave116
Philosopher
 
jonesdave116's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Posts: 5,170
Originally Posted by Sol88 View Post
Confirmed by peer reviewed scientist, like yourself.

Charge Separation, Electric Currents, Electric Fields

Ahhh... the good 'ol days of arguing over whether they're real or not.

Well glad we are all reading from the same page now, though.

Cheers Deca et al
Is just more lies. No charge separation beyond the Debye length. No discharge woo. Why don't you deal with that? Still running away from the complete failure of your woo. Still basing your whole religion on lies and ignorance.
__________________
“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 8th April 2020, 01:26 AM   #1910
jonesdave116
Philosopher
 
jonesdave116's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Posts: 5,170
Quote:
DRY ROCKY landslides!
LIAR.

Once again, for the hard of reading, pathological liars amongst us;


Quote:
Abstract:

The variability of the runout length among 67P landslides can be attributed to the different volatile content located in the top few meters of the cometary crust, which can drive the mass movement.

Plain language summary:

In addition, the considerable variability among the different landslides of 67P suggests that different volatile contents located in the top few meters of the cometary crust play a fundamental role on mass movement, hence being a general indicator for the subsurface cometary heterogeneities.

Section 3:

This analysis suggests that the falling icy material constituting the comet is characterized by a mechanical behavior that is not comparable to the collapsed ice on other bodies.

Section 4.1:

This is clearly not enough to heat the ice (making it slippery or melting it, as in Iapetus case) and consequently decrease the friction of the collapsed mass. In summary, the apparent friction coefficients on 67P derived from this analysis are comparable to landslides characterizing water ice in the absence of frictional heating.

All these results make 67P a very peculiar object, mainly composed by ices and refractory materials, but characterized by rocky-type properties rather than icy-type characteristics. The rocky-type behavior we highlight with this work does not mean that the material constituting comet 67P is dense as rock, as the mean bulk density of 537.8 kg m-3 points out.

Section 4.2. Implication for Different Volatile Content in 67P:

We therefore suggest that the range of H/L values of 67P (between 0.50 and 0.97) can be explained by variations in the volatile content within the top few meters of the comet surface.

The different morphologies observed on 67P are hypothesized to be the result of regional to local variations of the volatile content (Vincent et al., 2015), differently processed by the diurnal and seasonal insolation changes while approaching perihelion. Our observations support this interpretation, suggesting that different H/L values of landslides on 67P can be expression of different volatile contents within the collapsed material. Indeed, volatiles that are released by sublimating cliffs during the gravitational event might facilitate longer landslides runouts length trough overpressure at the sliding surface.

Therefore, we indicate that lower values of H/L are representative of a higher concentration of volatile translating in longer landslides runouts, while higher H/L values reflect a smaller content of volatiles hence resulting in shorter landslide runouts. These values imply that for comets, different H/L values can be used as an indicator of the different localized volatile content that fosters the material to slide nearer or farther from the scarp face.

Conclusion:

This behavior agrees with the refractory to ice ratio estimated from grains ejected from 67P (Fulle et al., 2019). In addition, the considerable variability of H/L values among the different landslides suggests that different volatile contents of the detached mass play a fundamental role on the gravitational process and final runout, hence being a general indicator for the subsurface cometary heterogeneities.

You are a pathetic, pathological liar.
__________________
“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; 8th April 2020 at 01:31 AM.
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 8th April 2020, 01:34 AM   #1911
jonesdave116
Philosopher
 
jonesdave116's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Posts: 5,170
Quote:
From someone that gave up on plasma physics 'cos the maths was too hard???
LIAR.

I said I was reluctant to get hugely into it, because, for something that I only had a passing interest in, there was a lot of study involved, and a lot of complicated maths. I did not say I could not understand it. So piss off with your pathetic lies. I doubt you could recite the twelve times table without a cheat sheet.
__________________
“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 8th April 2020, 01:37 AM   #1912
jonesdave116
Philosopher
 
jonesdave116's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Posts: 5,170
Quote:
DLs (Plasma Double Layers) are physically impossible at comets [/b].

Why, Reality Check?

Stop asking questions that have already been answered multiple times, and deal with your scientifically impossible, failed woo.
__________________
“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 8th April 2020, 01:42 AM   #1913
jonesdave116
Philosopher
 
jonesdave116's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Posts: 5,170
Quote:
Which has more water reality check, asteroid/meteorites or dirtysnowballs?
And which has more ice? And which asteroids? Which comets? And what has any of that got to do with your failed woo? No rock, no discharges. When are you going to deal with that? Instead of the persistent lies and gish galloping?
__________________
“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 8th April 2020, 01:44 AM   #1914
jonesdave116
Philosopher
 
jonesdave116's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Posts: 5,170
Originally Posted by tusenfem View Post
This greatly undermines your "theory" that the dust is pulled from the surface by your "double layer". How can one electric field accelerate both positively and negatively charged dust from the surface?
Well, the whole electric sun woo requires the Sun to be an anode that simultaneously attracts and repels electrons! If you can believe crap like that, you can believe anything!
__________________
“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 8th April 2020, 01:48 AM   #1915
jonesdave116
Philosopher
 
jonesdave116's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Posts: 5,170
Quote:
The rock detected at Tempel 1 and Wild 2 not enough for you?
Is another LIE. Learn the difference between rocks and dust. Do I need to post a picture?

EDIT:

Yep, I probably do!;

Rock:



Dust;

__________________
“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; 8th April 2020 at 01:52 AM.
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 8th April 2020, 02:00 AM   #1916
jonesdave116
Philosopher
 
jonesdave116's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Posts: 5,170
Quote:
But in this case a magnetic field aligned ambipolar electric field is a double layer!
Lol. No it isn't! Hahaha. Why don't you go to school and learn some stuff, and then, assuming you do well enough (unlikely), go to uni and learn the relevant science? So, as I understand it, DLs are going to accelerate ions and electrons in the opposite direction. What have Deca et al got this field doing? Accelerating ions, and retarding electrons. To maintain quasi-neutrality. Look up 'acceleration' in a dictionary. And then look up 'retard'. It will say 'Thornhill'!
Sigh, you really do not have clue one about science, and would be best advised to stick to your mythology inspired woo, along with the rest of the scientifically challenged idiots of the EU.
__________________
“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 8th April 2020, 02:13 AM   #1917
jonesdave116
Philosopher
 
jonesdave116's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Posts: 5,170
So, why the similarities in comet landslides and those on Earth, regarding their runout lengths?

Quote:
The strength-to-gravity ratio is similar for 67P and weak rocks on Earth.
Gravitational slopes, geomorphology, and material strengths of the nucleus of comet 67P/Churyumov-Gerasimenko from OSIRIS observations
Groussin, O. et al. (2015)
https://www.aanda.org/articles/aa/ab...a26379-15.html

So, the gravity of 67P is ~ 10-5 that of Earth. Find a terrestrial weak rock, and obtain its compressive and tensile strengths. Then divide those numbers by 105 to obtain the cometary material strength.
__________________
“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 8th April 2020, 02:42 AM   #1918
tusenfem
Master Poster
 
tusenfem's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 2,975
Originally Posted by Sol88 View Post
But in this case a magnetic field aligned ambipolar electric field is a double layer!
The show it, that is has the characteristics of a double layer.
__________________
Scientific progress goes *BOINK* -- Calvin & Hobbes
twitter: @tusenfem -- Super Duper Space Plasma Physicist
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 8th April 2020, 02:43 AM   #1919
tusenfem
Master Poster
 
tusenfem's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 2,975
Originally Posted by Sol88 View Post
Ummm... no it does not.

It actual mean YOU (mainstream) are dealing with a complex dusty plasma.

Geez, thought we sent you too school for learnin's.


Are ions being accelerated away from a comet? Are electrons being accelerated away from the nucleus?

How?

Not by dust drag/friction that's for sure!
sure electrons and ions are accelerated away from the comet by the same electric field.
__________________
Scientific progress goes *BOINK* -- Calvin & Hobbes
twitter: @tusenfem -- Super Duper Space Plasma Physicist
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 8th April 2020, 02:46 AM   #1920
tusenfem
Master Poster
 
tusenfem's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 2,975
Originally Posted by Sol88 View Post
since ya around tusenfem and since your "in the game", what is your take on this...

The rocky-like behavior of cometary landslides on 67P/Churyumov-Gerasimenko

Keep quite on that one because it's not your discipline to tell them they are wrong?
Indeed, not my field.
It says "rocky-like".
That last sentence does not make any sense, learn to write comprehensively if you want people to understand you.
__________________
Scientific progress goes *BOINK* -- Calvin & Hobbes
twitter: @tusenfem -- Super Duper Space Plasma Physicist
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
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 06:54 PM.
Powered by vBulletin. Copyright ©2000 - 2021, 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.