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

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


Welcome to the International Skeptics Forum, where we discuss skepticism, critical thinking, the paranormal and science in a friendly but lively way. You are currently viewing the forum as a guest, which means you are missing out on discussing matters that are of interest to you. Please consider registering so you can gain full use of the forum features and interact with other Members. Registration is simple, fast and free! Click here to register today.
Reply
Old 18th October 2020, 01:43 AM   #881
Lukraak_Sisser
Illuminator
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Posts: 3,838
Given all three yesses, can you then explain why the discharge (removing negative charge) moves AWAY from the direction it should?

After all, in an electric system negative charge will move FROM the negative pole (the comet) TO the positive pole (the Sun). This is basic electricity, pretty simple stuff. But beyond the limited tool box of EC apparently.

You keep mentioning fluff words, but refuse to explain why in the ELECTRIC comet system electricity behaves the opposite way from every electric system ever.
Lukraak_Sisser is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 18th October 2020, 02:04 AM   #882
Sol88
Philosopher
 
Sol88's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 6,329
Originally Posted by Lukraak_Sisser View Post
Given all three yesses, can you then explain why the discharge (removing negative charge) moves AWAY from the direction it should?

After all, in an electric system negative charge will move FROM the negative pole (the comet) TO the positive pole (the Sun). This is basic electricity, pretty simple stuff. But beyond the limited tool box of EC apparently.

You keep mentioning fluff words, but refuse to explain why in the ELECTRIC comet system electricity behaves the opposite way from every electric system ever.
Yawn.....

Quote:
jonesdave116
Originally Posted by Sol88 View Post
Where does the Sun’s plasma start and finish?
The Sun. to The heliopause. Duh!
You up to speed on Birkeland current, flux ropes, field aligned currents?

or you still a pithball sorta electricity person?

If not, best ya brush up...Birkeland Currents: A Force-Free Field-Aligned Model

Quote:
Fig. 3:

Cross-section of a force-free current. In this view the reader is looking in the +z-direction, in the direction of main cur- rent flow. The radius values shown are plotted as values of r = x/α (α = 0.075), which were used in the Euler iterative solution of (36) and (37). At the radius values shown, the axial B-field is zero-valued so the total field is only azimuthal (either clockwise or counter- clockwise circles).
This is seen in the Uyless data.

as per my post...
Quote:
Quote:
"If it can persist as far as Ulysses, there's no reason to presume that it wouldn't continue to the edge of the heliosphere (the boundary about 100AU from the Sun between the solar wind and the interstellar medium)," says Jones.
Ulysses feels the brush of a comet's tail
Best not to be so ignorant, don't ya think?
__________________
“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 Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 18th October 2020, 02:09 AM   #883
Sol88
Philosopher
 
Sol88's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 6,329
In case you missed it.
__________________
“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; 18th October 2020 at 02:12 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 Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 18th October 2020, 02:17 AM   #884
Sol88
Philosopher
 
Sol88's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 6,329
Originally Posted by Lukraak_Sisser View Post
Given all three yesses, can you then explain why the discharge (removing negative charge) moves AWAY from the direction it should?

After all, in an electric system negative charge will move FROM the negative pole (the comet) TO the positive pole (the Sun). This is basic electricity, pretty simple stuff. But beyond the limited tool box of EC apparently.

You keep mentioning fluff words, but refuse to explain why in the ELECTRIC comet system electricity behaves the opposite way from every electric system ever.

How do you think it works?

Considering the sublimation model, the mainstream model, is a bust?

As per

2 THE NUCLEUS SHAPE
3 A HIGH DUST-TO-WATER RATIO
4 ACTIVE AREAS HARD TO FIND
5 NO DISTRIBUTED WATER SOURCES
6 SEASONS DRIVE ACTUAL ACTIVITY
7 THERMO-PHYSICAL MODELS FAIL
11 CONCLUSIONS

Have you even bothered to read the paper?
__________________
“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 Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 18th October 2020, 03:25 AM   #885
Lukraak_Sisser
Illuminator
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Posts: 3,838
Ah, so the EC model works with magic words that can make electricity behave differently in outer space (except when our machines are in outer space or are measuring things in outer space), which has never been reproduced in any way, shape or form.

Check.
Lukraak_Sisser is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 18th October 2020, 03:48 AM   #886
Sol88
Philosopher
 
Sol88's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 6,329
Originally Posted by Lukraak_Sisser View Post
Ah, so the EC model works with magic words that can make electricity behave differently in outer space (except when our machines are in outer space or are measuring things in outer space), which has never been reproduced in any way, shape or form.

Check.
Ok, if ya say so.

You can only lead a horse to water...
__________________
“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 Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 18th October 2020, 04:01 AM   #887
steenkh
Philosopher
 
steenkh's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Denmark
Posts: 6,011
Originally Posted by Sol88 View Post
Ummmmm......Active asteroid Bennu is.
You are so predictable. I have previously noted that if I forgot to mention that the tail should be visible like a comet’s tail, you would pounce on it, and act as if “active” asteroids have tails. And of course you did, thereby avoiding the difficult answer for the second time since I started counting. Suits me right for forgetting the word “visible”!

Quote:
Fairly obvious even to the more simple amongst us that asteroid and comets are a continuum.
That is indeed fairly obvious. Mainstream science has known this for a long time. But whereas mainstream science knows that it is the amount of ice that determines if there is a - visible - tail, you have absolutely no idea what is at the ends of this continuum.

Quote:
Besides composition, which can vary, so can the charge it exchanges with the ambient plasma

Some asteroids are in equilibrium with the surrounding plasma, some not.
But you claim that they are both rocky bodies with no ice, so just why are some “in equilibrium” and others are not? Have you, and the rest of your sect, really never considered this? (You admitted previously that it was an important question, but you seem not to give it much thought)
__________________
Steen

--
Jack of all trades - master of none!
steenkh is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 18th October 2020, 04:11 AM   #888
Sol88
Philosopher
 
Sol88's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 6,329
Originally Posted by steenkh View Post
You are so predictable. I have previously noted that if I forgot to mention that the tail should be visible like a comet’s tail, you would pounce on it, and act as if “active” asteroids have tails. And of course you did, thereby avoiding the difficult answer for the second time since I started counting. Suits me right for forgetting the word “visible”!


That is indeed fairly obvious. Mainstream science has known this for a long time. But whereas mainstream science knows that it is the amount of ice that determines if there is a - visible - tail, you have absolutely no idea what is at the ends of this continuum.


But you claim that they are both rocky bodies with no ice, so just why are some “in equilibrium” and others are not? Have you, and the rest of your sect, really never considered this? (You admitted previously that it was an important question, but you seem not to give it much thought)

There ya go

Quote:
amount of ice that determines if there is a - visible - tail,
How, considering your model the Dirtysnowball is a fail?

Amaze me, go on!

Remember,

Quote:
This may make comets and KBOs less rich in water than CI-chondrites, which have a Refractory-to-Water mass ratio close to 5.5 (Marty et al. 2016) and the water included in minerals, which is not the case for the 67P dust (Schulz et al. 2015). This constraint confirms that comets can be defined as “mineral organices” (Fulle et al. 2016b), i.e. a mixture of minerals and organics with a minor mass fraction of ices mixed among them, and provides a disentangling test for all models describing the (probably common) origin of comets and KBOs.
The Refractory-to-Ice Mass Ratio in Comets

Further;

Quote:
Even if the nucleus were composed of pure ice from a depth of 1.5 cm downwards, the entire surface of 67P would release a negligible water fraction of that observed (Gulkis et al. 2015; Keller et al. 2015b). This proves that all the water-vapour is coming from the uppermost surface layer thinner than 1 cm, i.e. the size of the largest pebbles ejected at 3.6 au inbound (Rotundi et al. 2015), and a factor of 100 thinner than the metre-sized chunks ejected at perihelion (Fulle et al. 2016). This fact further suggests that a force independent of vapour pressure is breaking the link between dust and the nucleus surface, after which the dust is accelerated in the coma by vapour drag.
Please take note of the title

Unexpected and significant findings in comet 67P/Churyumov–Gerasimenko: an interdisciplinary view

Unexpected from a Dirtysnowball model falsified that model.
__________________
“No rock. Any charge separation is limited. The electric field is pointing in the wrong direction. Currents are doing nothing.” Jonesdave116.

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

Last edited by Sol88; 18th October 2020 at 04:18 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 Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 18th October 2020, 04:19 AM   #889
Sol88
Philosopher
 
Sol88's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 6,329
Steenkh,

Is the tail of a comet just gas? From all the ice.
Any dust?


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

Steenkh, I take it you can read a dictionary? Look up evolving.
__________________
“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; 18th October 2020 at 04:54 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 Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 18th October 2020, 05:48 AM   #890
jonesdave116
Illuminator
 
jonesdave116's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Posts: 4,943
Originally Posted by Sol88 View Post
How do you think it works?

Considering the sublimation model, the mainstream model, is a bust?

As per

2 THE NUCLEUS SHAPE
3 A HIGH DUST-TO-WATER RATIO
4 ACTIVE AREAS HARD TO FIND
5 NO DISTRIBUTED WATER SOURCES
6 SEASONS DRIVE ACTUAL ACTIVITY
7 THERMO-PHYSICAL MODELS FAIL
11 CONCLUSIONS

Have you even bothered to read the paper?
The paper has nothing to do with your failed woo. Try to stick to your failed woo. Which is the subject of this thread. Found any rock yet? Any discharges? Any EDM (lol)? No. So your woo has failed. Goodbye.
__________________
“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 Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 18th October 2020, 05:50 AM   #891
jonesdave116
Illuminator
 
jonesdave116's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Posts: 4,943
Originally Posted by Sol88 View Post
Steenkh,

Is the tail of a comet just gas? From all the ice.
Any dust?


M.A’Hearn

Steenkh, I take it you can read a dictionary? Look up evolving.
Stop lying. No rock ever seen at a comet. And you have had plenty of opportunity to show evidence for it. You can't. All you can do is continually lie and obfuscate. Because science is beyond you.
__________________
“There is in every village a torch - the teacher; and an extinguisher - the priest.” - Victor Hugo

“Never argue with an idiot. They will only bring you down to their level and beat you with experience.” - George Carlin
jonesdave116 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 18th October 2020, 05:51 AM   #892
jonesdave116
Illuminator
 
jonesdave116's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Posts: 4,943
Quote:
Unexpected from a Dirtysnowball model falsified that model.
That is your own strawman, liar. Stop lying. 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 Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 18th October 2020, 05:56 AM   #893
jonesdave116
Illuminator
 
jonesdave116's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Posts: 4,943
Quote:
Where does the Sun’s plasma start and finish?
The Sun. to The heliopause. Duh!
Yes, and that is a quasi-neutral plasma. Get it through your thick head that in your impossible woo the Sun is an anode. Do you know what an anode is? And what it attracts? And what it repels? So, if the cometary material is negative, which way should it be going? Duh! The same way as your non-existent current to power the scientifically impossible electric sun. Yes? And which way is that? This is like trying to teach QM to a chimp. A rather dim chimp, at that.
__________________
“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 Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 18th October 2020, 06:01 AM   #894
Lukraak_Sisser
Illuminator
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Posts: 3,838
Originally Posted by Sol88 View Post
Ok, if ya say so.

You can only lead a horse to water...
And yet you keep walking away from the stream.

Because, as I've mentioned before, if your plasma birkeland freeform fields would work, you'd be unmentionably rich as you'd revolutionize all electrical appliances everywhere.

So until you can actually PROVE that it is possible to make a discharge take a path away from the expected one, your theory hasn't got a leg to stand on.
I await eagerly the actual experimental evidence. Because even your vaunted SAFIRE cannot do what you claim.
Lukraak_Sisser is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 18th October 2020, 06:02 AM   #895
jonesdave116
Illuminator
 
jonesdave116's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Posts: 4,943
Originally Posted by Sol88 View Post

The comet nucleus is less positive than the surrounding ambient plasma. The comets seeks to reach potential equilibrium with the surrounding plasma.
Lol. The surrounding plasma is quasi-neutral. Fail. And there is no charge worth talking about on the comet. We might have noticed that. We did land on it, after all. Fail. And the solar wind is cut off from the nucleus for many months. Fail. And asteroids are permanently subjected to this plasma woo, and are not turning into comets. Fail.

Quote:
Unfortunately, it’s elliptical orbit consistently moves thru vary charge space effects of the solar plasma, never quite reaching equilibrium.
Hahahaha! There is no varying charge. The solar wind is quasi-neutral at 1 AU, and is still quasi-neutral at 100 AU. Fail. And asteroids on cometary orbits are not turning into comets. And you can't explain why. Fail.

Quote:
Pretty basic stuff but beyond the limited tool box of a Dirtysnowball.
Nope, scientifically impossible gibberish, invented by scientifically illiterate mythologists. 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 Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 18th October 2020, 06:08 AM   #896
jonesdave116
Illuminator
 
jonesdave116's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Posts: 4,943
Originally Posted by Sol88 View Post
Jonesdave116, now try not to be to embarrassed.

How in your, obviously better understanding of the relevant science’s than mine, do cometary “jets” work?

Prediction for the lurkers, he (mainstream) doesn’t know.

So expect a rant based on myth....
They work as they are seen to work at the comet and in the lab. Due to sublimation (observed) entraining dust (observed) and sometimes ice (observed). Do try to keep up.
__________________
“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 Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 18th October 2020, 06:13 AM   #897
jonesdave116
Illuminator
 
jonesdave116's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Posts: 4,943
Quote:
Strawman.

You have no idea and nether do I.
Yes I do. Because I have read your woo. It is most definitely based on mythology woo. As plainly stated by the idiots Thornhill and Talbott. Your impossible lightning bolts come from Venus doing handbrake turns around the solar system, and getting too close to Earth and Mars. So close, that all three planets would have been turned into molten slag heaps. Something that we might have noticed, even if the cause didn't violate the laws of physics.
You believe in mythology-based woo, whether you realise it or not. Whatever you believe, it has nothing to do with science. Which is why it only attracts people who don't understand science. Like you.
__________________
“There is in every village a torch - the teacher; and an extinguisher - the priest.” - Victor Hugo

“Never argue with an idiot. They will only bring you down to their level and beat you with experience.” - George Carlin
jonesdave116 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 18th October 2020, 06:17 AM   #898
jonesdave116
Illuminator
 
jonesdave116's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Posts: 4,943
Quote:
Besides composition, which can vary, so can the charge it exchanges with the ambient plasma

Some asteroids are in equilibrium with the surrounding plasma, some not.
And the tiny few that are seen to be active are in the main belt, on ~ circular orbits. However, the ones on the same orbits as comets are not seen to be active. Weird, huh? And you can't explain why. Due to not understanding any relevant science.
__________________
“There is in every village a torch - the teacher; and an extinguisher - the priest.” - Victor Hugo

“Never argue with an idiot. They will only bring you down to their level and beat you with experience.” - George Carlin
jonesdave116 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 18th October 2020, 06:21 AM   #899
jonesdave116
Illuminator
 
jonesdave116's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Posts: 4,943
Quote:
Dirtysnowballs, where the ice? In your incorrect assumption, that’s where...
Liar. One, the dirty snowball has been dead for decades, as has been pointed out to you numerous times. However, you continue to lie about it. Due to being a liar. And secondly, there is plenty of ice. Which has been documented numerous times. And you just keep ignoring it, and continue to lie. Due to being a liar with no understanding of even basic science.
All you have is lies and obfuscation. You have no science, no mechanisms and no evidence.
__________________
“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 Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 18th October 2020, 06:24 AM   #900
jonesdave116
Illuminator
 
jonesdave116's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Posts: 4,943
Quote:
Comets are charged rocky bodies discharging in the solar plasma.
Liar. Continuing to lie about something is not going to make it come true. No rock, no discharges. No EDM (lol). If it's there, show us the detections, or stop lying. Simple, yes? My guess? You are incapable of stopping lying. It is all you have left. Rather pathetic, yes?
__________________
“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 Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 18th October 2020, 12:04 PM   #901
Sol88
Philosopher
 
Sol88's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 6,329
Originally Posted by jonesdave116 View Post
Liar. One, the dirty snowball has been dead for decades, as has been pointed out to you numerous times. However, you continue to lie about it. Due to being a liar. And secondly, there is plenty of ice. Which has been documented numerous times. And you just keep ignoring it, and continue to lie. Due to being a liar with no understanding of even basic science.
All you have is lies and obfuscation. You have no science, no mechanisms and no evidence.
Dead ya reckon?

Well I think you and steenkh should sit down and have a chat.

See if you can at least be consistent.

Quote:
That is indeed fairly obvious. Mainstream science has known this for a long time. But whereas mainstream science knows that it is the amount of ice that determines if there is a - visible - tail, you have absolutely no idea what is at the ends of this continuum.
Of a dead Dirtysnowball model...

In the mainstreams blinkered, view. There is a difference between comets and asteroids.

And it’s all about the mythical ice!

So, jonesdave116, what model is the correct model?

Considering mainstream peer reviewed papers indeed assign more water to rocky asteroids than icy comets?




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

Quote:
How dust can leave the nucleus surface is still not understood (Gundlach et al. 2015).
Unexpected and significant findings in comet 67P/Churyumov–Gerasimenko: an interdisciplinary view

Really? With all those experts including the arm chair variety here?

Best get ya act together, 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

Last edited by Sol88; 18th October 2020 at 12:19 PM.
Sol88 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 18th October 2020, 12:21 PM   #902
Sol88
Philosopher
 
Sol88's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 6,329
I’ll give ya tip.

The dust is charged and being electrostaticly blown of the surface.

This constitutes and ELECTRIC CURRENT. A discharge from the nucleus to the Sun (solar plasma)

This is how the comet loses mass, as per
Quote:
V. MASS LOSS DUE TO ELECTROSTATIC BLOW-OFF

Let us next consider the total mass loss from a long period comet traversing the region of the supersonic solar wind (¿/<70 AU). This is difficult to calculate accurately because the escaping charged grains them- selves constitute a current, and a proper calculation of the mass loss rate.
__________________
“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; 18th October 2020 at 12:24 PM.
Sol88 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 18th October 2020, 12:26 PM   #903
Sol88
Philosopher
 
Sol88's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 6,329
The rest is jonesdave116 pathetic attempt at setting up strawmen.

Liar, liar pants on fire.... grown up, mate.

Comets AND asteroids are rocky objects exchanging charge with the solar plasma.

Quote:
All objects in space exchange charge with their surroundings, mainly due to the collection of charged particles impacting the object and emission of electrons via the photoelectric effect and secondary emission.
__________________
“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; 18th October 2020 at 12:28 PM.
Sol88 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 18th October 2020, 02:17 PM   #904
Sol88
Philosopher
 
Sol88's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 6,329
Talking about mythology and religion....


What a tangled mess
__________________
“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 Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 18th October 2020, 03:10 PM   #905
Sol88
Philosopher
 
Sol88's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 6,329
Originally Posted by jonesdave116 View Post
Yes I do. Because I have read your woo. It is most definitely based on mythology woo. As plainly stated by the idiots Thornhill and Talbott. Your impossible lightning bolts come from Venus doing handbrake turns around the solar system, and getting too close to Earth and Mars. So close, that all three planets would have been turned into molten slag heaps. Something that we might have noticed, even if the cause didn't violate the laws of physics.
You believe in mythology-based woo, whether you realise it or not. Whatever you believe, it has nothing to do with science. Which is why it only attracts people who don't understand science. Like you.
Shall we start a thread on Immanuel Velikovsky

This thread is about the ELECTRIC COMET. Not it’s origins or history.

Comets are charged rocky bodies discharging in the solar plasma.

I don’t and neither do you, have any idea where they came from.

The Rosetta mission blew the Dirtysnowball out of the water, as you state 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 Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 18th October 2020, 03:12 PM   #906
Sol88
Philosopher
 
Sol88's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 6,329
Originally Posted by jonesdave116 View Post
Liar. One, the dirty snowball has been dead for decades, as has been pointed out to you numerous times. However, you continue to lie about it. Due to being a liar. And secondly, there is plenty of ice. Which has been documented numerous times. And you just keep ignoring it, and continue to lie. Due to being a liar with no understanding of even basic science.
All you have is lies and obfuscation. You have no science, no mechanisms and no evidence.
Talking about obfuscation, which model are the mainstream using now then, jonesdave116?

Is that crickets I can hear from you again...

No answer is an admission from you that both the Dirtysnowball model is a failure and mainstream have no viable model.
__________________
“No rock. Any charge separation is limited. The electric field is pointing in the wrong direction. Currents are doing nothing.” Jonesdave116.

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

Last edited by Sol88; 18th October 2020 at 03:13 PM.
Sol88 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 18th October 2020, 06:40 PM   #907
Sol88
Philosopher
 
Sol88's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 6,329
Quote:
The big, black, roundish, carbon-rich space rock—taller than New York's Empire State Building—was around when our solar system was forming 4.5 billion years ago. Scientists consider it a time capsule full of pristine building blocks that could help explain how life formed on Earth and possibly elsewhere.
Rocky Asteroid Bennu

Pristine building blocks of how life formed on Earth?

Quote:
Comets are pristine remnants from the formation of the solar system that are comprised of minerals, rock and mostly ice, much like a dirty snowball.
comets

Steenkh, what’s the difference between a comet and an asteroid, again?
__________________
“No rock. Any charge separation is limited. The electric field is pointing in the wrong direction. Currents are doing nothing.” Jonesdave116.

“The 'electric comet' is physically IMPOSSIBLE to model using mainstream science! PERIOD! True story! End of story!” Indagator
Sol88 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 18th October 2020, 09:53 PM   #908
steenkh
Philosopher
 
steenkh's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Denmark
Posts: 6,011
Originally Posted by Sol88 View Post
There ya go



How, considering your model the Dirtysnowball is a fail?

Amaze me, go on!

Remember,

The Refractory-to-Ice Mass Ratio in Comets

Further;



Please take note of the title

Unexpected and significant findings in comet 67P/Churyumov–Gerasimenko: an interdisciplinary view

Unexpected from a Dirtysnowball model falsified that model.

Yet another post bringing irrelevant criticism of mainstream science instead of addressing why there are differences between comets and asteroids when your religion tells us that they are the same. That would be non-answer number 4. Keep it up!
__________________
Steen

--
Jack of all trades - master of none!
steenkh is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 18th October 2020, 09:54 PM   #909
steenkh
Philosopher
 
steenkh's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Denmark
Posts: 6,011
Originally Posted by Sol88 View Post
Steenkh,

Is the tail of a comet just gas? From all the ice.
Any dust?


M.A’Hearn

Steenkh, I take it you can read a dictionary? Look up evolving.

Number 5! You certainly must have a problem when you so diligently want to avoid discussing it.
__________________
Steen

--
Jack of all trades - master of none!
steenkh is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 18th October 2020, 09:57 PM   #910
steenkh
Philosopher
 
steenkh's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Denmark
Posts: 6,011
Originally Posted by Sol88 View Post
Rocky Asteroid Bennu

Pristine building blocks of how life formed on Earth?

comets

Steenkh, what’s the difference between a comet and an asteroid, again?

You tell me! In your religion they are the same, but cannot explain why they look different.
__________________
Steen

--
Jack of all trades - master of none!
steenkh is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 19th October 2020, 12:00 AM   #911
tusenfem
Master Poster
 
tusenfem's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 2,878
For no reason whatsoever, I throw in this image of comet 21P/Giacobini-Zinner, taken from a ground based telescope in the H2O+ bandpass at 7025 Ångström, with superposed the projected magnetic field data from ICE.



Image taken from Slavin et al. [1986].
__________________
20 minutes into the future
This message is bra-bra-brought to you by z-z-z-zik zak
And-And-And I'm going to be back with you - on Network 23 after these real-real-real-really exciting messages

(Max Headroom)
follow me on twitter: @tusenfem, or follow Rosetta Plasma Consortium: @Rosetta_RPC
tusenfem is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old Yesterday, 04:55 AM   #912
Sol88
Philosopher
 
Sol88's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 6,329
Originally Posted by steenkh View Post
You tell me! In your religion they are the same, but cannot explain why they look different.
Bunny pictures allowed now tusenfem?

Nice cross section of a Birkeland current, as described by Don Scott.



Anyhoo, steenkh, take note. That is a cometary tail. If we fly the same instruments “down wind” of, especially an active asteroid though any obstacle to the solar wind will set up an electric field.

This, depending on various factors will produce a “tail” on all charged rocky bodies discharging in the solar plasma.

Ice or no...
__________________
“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 Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old Yesterday, 05:53 AM   #913
tusenfem
Master Poster
 
tusenfem's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 2,878
Originally Posted by Sol88 View Post
Nice cross section of a Birkeland current, as described by Don Scott.
How can that be a Birkeland current????
It is a cross tail current, perpendicular to the magnetic field, separating the differently directed magnetic fields in either hemisphere of the tail.
__________________
20 minutes into the future
This message is bra-bra-brought to you by z-z-z-zik zak
And-And-And I'm going to be back with you - on Network 23 after these real-real-real-really exciting messages

(Max Headroom)
follow me on twitter: @tusenfem, or follow Rosetta Plasma Consortium: @Rosetta_RPC
tusenfem is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old Yesterday, 12:44 PM   #914
Reality Check
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: New Zealand
Posts: 27,421
Originally Posted by SDG View Post
It appears to me that a comet could resemble a Langmuir probe in a plasma discharge. ...
That is wrong, SDG.
A Langmuir probe is a scientific instrument.
Plasmas do not discharge because they have high conductivity. They have currents.
Comets are made of ice and dust that by itself is electrically neutral. They do not perturb EM fields. One of Sol88's many lies is that the mainstream prediction of the solar wind electrostatically charging dust on the surface of nuclei and theoretically ejecting some dust is part of the electric comet delusions. That temporary charging when comets are roughly 3 to 5 AU from the Sun and before the coma blocks the solar wind from the nucleus, will perturb the real solar electromagnetic field around the comet.

The Thunderbolts cranks have a delusion thunderbolts between the Sun and comets. The EC model is built on a delusion that the Sun has a massive charge, that charge creates an undetected massive radial solar electric field, that imaginary electric field charges up comets and there are thunderbolts (electric discharges) between the Sun and comets.
Reality Check is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old Yesterday, 01:47 PM   #915
Sol88
Philosopher
 
Sol88's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 6,329
Originally Posted by tusenfem View Post
For no reason whatsoever, I throw in this image of comet 21P/Giacobini-Zinner, taken from a ground based telescope in the H2O+ bandpass at 7025 Ångström, with superposed the projected magnetic field data from ICE.

http://www.internationalskeptics.com...d387dd7614.jpg

Image taken from Slavin et al. [1986].

Looks complicated mathematically, up close.

But further down a cometary tail,
Quote:
One of the most surprising aspects of the discovery is the length of Hyakutake's tail. Cometary experts had thought that comet tails eventually spread out and lose their integrity. "We found that the whole thing is preserved as an entity and doesn't spread out very much," says Gloeckler. "If it can persist as far as Ulysses, there's no reason to presume that it wouldn't continue to the edge of the heliosphere (the boundary about 100AU from the Sun between the solar wind and the interstellar medium)," says Jones.
__________________
“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 Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old Yesterday, 03:17 PM   #916
Reality Check
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: New Zealand
Posts: 27,421
Exclamation Years of lying about posts, posters and science continues

  1. Sol88 lies with "Some of the confabulations they can come up" when it is Sol88 who has been spewing thousands of lies for 11 years.
  2. Sol88 lies "they think the ELECTRIC COMET is impossible." when we know the physical evidence that makes Sol88's dogma impossible and thus, e.g. > 70 years of measured comet density and composition..
  3. Sol88 lies with "we , including the mainstream " when only Sol88 and his deluded cult believe that comets are the Thunderbolts delusion of "charged rocky bodies exchanging charge with the SUN".
  4. Sol88 lies with "why they still think giant lightning bolts too the Sun is necessary!" when that is Sol88 and his deluded cult's dogma.
  5. Sol88 lies with "Comets are CHARGED ROCKY bodies EXCHANGING CHARGE with the SOLAR PLASMA" when comets are ice and dust, this is the mainstream prediction of temporary, undetected charging comet dust by the solar wind, thus this not his cult's deluded dogma of thunderbolts between comets and the Sun.
  6. Sol88 lies with "Charge seperation" which is not his cult's deluded dogma.
  7. Sol88 lies with "solar wind made be quasi neutral" when Sol88 knows quasi-neutrality is a basic property of plasmas.
  8. Sol88 lies with "that does no mean charge separation is a non starter." when Sol88 knows this is nothing to do with quasi-neutrality.
  9. Sol88 lies with "Divin and Deca have shown this to be the case at comets" which is not his cult's deluded dogma.
  10. Sol88 lies with "has been shown is it is NOT necessary for the solar wind to have DIRECT access to the nucleus" when Sol88 has been lying about mainstream ice and dust comet papers stating that the solar wind has to reach the nucleus to electrostatically charge dust.
  11. Sol88's obsession with mainstream charging of dust.
  12. Sol88 lies with " electric current, a DISCHARGE" when an electric current is not a discharge which is a sudden current caused when an insulating medium breaks down. Sol88 and his deluded cult demand actual lightning at comets .
  13. Sol88 lies with "The ELECTRIC COMET!" when mainstream ice and dust cometary science is not his cult's deluded dogma.
  14. Sol88 lies with "What’s going on here, jd116?" when the quotes are Sol88's obsession with mainstream charged dust at comets.
  15. Sol88 insults jonesdave116 and ignores his Lol. No they aren't. Stop lying. It's pathetic. They are not even in contact with the solar wind for months on end. post.
  16. Sol88 insults his cult's prophet Wal Thornhill ! We know that Thornhill is a documented liar and self-documented as deluded about physics. Sol88 however is parroting the deluded dogma partially authored by Thornhill.
  17. Sol88 lies with "Anywho, the problem at hand." when there is no problem with Sol88 constantly showing the world that his cult's is deluded.
  18. Sol88 lies with "Comets are charged rocky bodies discharging in the solar plasma.".
  19. Sol88 lies about tusenfem's post which is that Sol88 has a personal definition of "discharge" that is not his "EC funnies" definition.
  20. Sol88's delusion that the mainstream, undetected, theoretical and temporary electrostatic ejection of dust makes jets when jets do not exist during this process.
  21. Sol88 lies with "one of the primary goals of Rosetta" when it was an expectation that the mainstream, theoretical and temporary electrostatic ejection of dust would be still going on and detectable when Rosetta arrived.
  22. Sol88 lies with "to find how they work" when Sol88's idiocy about the mainstream, theoretical and temporary electrostatic ejection of dust forming jets is a delusion because jets form after the electrostatic charging by the solar wind stops.
  23. Sol88 lies with "how they work(via sublimation)" which is not his delusion about jets of electrostatically ejected dust when that dust has never been detected.
  24. Sol88 lies with "are indeed DISCHARGES" when Sol88 knows that Rosetta did not detect any of his delusion of electric discharges at comets.
  25. Sol88 lies with "sublimation model has failed" when sublimation is an observation.
  26. Sol88 lies with "7 THERMO-PHYSICAL MODELS FAIL" which is not his cult's deluded dogma.
  27. Sol88 lies with "The Dirtysnowball has been falsified." when the physical evidence is still that comets are ice and dust.
  28. Sol88 lies with "Strawman" when Sol88 has stated that his whole cult is based on mythology which is one reason why it is deluded and the basis of his cult's delusions. Those delusions are the subject of this thread.
  29. Sol88 lies with "You have no idea and nether do I." when we all know that his cult is based on mythology.
  30. Sol88 lies with "Comets are charged rocky bodies discharging in the solar plasma.".
  31. Sol8 lies with "Your model fails every prediction made for a Dirtysnowball."
  32. Sol88 lies with "On the other hand, asteroids contain more water than comets."
  33. Sol88 lies with "Are rocky."
  34. Sol88 lies with "No reason why they would not be charged." when no one is saying that comets cannot be charged - jus not as his cult's delusions demand.
  35. Sol88's delusion that the mainstream, undetected, theoretical and temporary electrostatic ejection of dust makes jets when jets do not exist during this process.
  36. Sol88 lies with "Dirtysnowballs, where the ice?" when Sol88 has known about the detection of ice on comets for many years.
  37. Sol88 lies about "7 THERMO-PHYSICAL MODELS FAIL" yet again which is not about a lack of ice.
  38. Sol88 lies with "do cometary “jets” work?" when cometary jets exist and debunk his cult's deluded dogma by vanishing in shadows, i.e. they do not emit light like his deluded discharges do.
  39. Sol88 lies with "he (mainstream) doesn’t know" when Sol88 has cited mainstream papers on cometary jets.
  40. Sol88 lies about asteroid Bennu yet again when Bennu debunks his deluded dogma.
  41. Sol88 lies with "asteroid and comets are a continuum" when only active asteroids share some features with comets.
  42. Sol88 lies with "charge it exchanges with the ambient plasma" which is not his cult's deluded dogma.
  43. Sol88 writes "Some asteroids are in equilibrium with the surrounding plasma, some not." idiocy that is not his cult's deluded dogma.
  44. Sol88 writes more idiocy about this gibberish which is not his cult's deluded dogma.
  45. Sol88 writes a lie that a disintegrating comet is exploding from his charge/plasma idiocy that is not cult's deluded dogma.
  46. Sol88 writes more idiocy about his charge/plasma gibberish which is not his cult's deluded dogma.
  47. Sol88 writes "Yawn....." stupidity when high school children know that an electric discharge goes between the charged areas.
  48. Sol88 lies with "Birkeland current, flux ropes, field aligned currents?" which is not his deluded dogma about comets.
  49. Sol88 cites an irrelevant paper by his deluded cult prophet Don Scott.
  50. Sol88 lies with "This is seen in the Uyless data." when an ignorant follower of a cult mindlessly parroting their deluded dogma is blatantly ignorant about spacecraft data. The only Birkeland currents that have been detected in space were around Earth .
  51. Sol88 lies with "as per my post." which just his lies about the Ulysses spacecraft.
  52. Sol88 insults Lukraak_Sisser.
  53. Sol88 lies with "How do you think it works?" when Lukraak_Sisser's post is about Sol88's deluded dogma and comet tails.
  54. Sol88 lies with "the sublimation model, the mainstream model, is a bust?".
  55. Sol88 lies with "Have you even bothered to read the paper?" which is not about Sol88's deluded dogma so no one needs to read it.
  56. Sol88 lies with "your model the Dirtysnowball is a fail?"
  57. Sol88 lies with "The Refractory-to-Ice Mass Ratio in Comets" which is not his cult's deluded dogma.
  58. Sol88 lies with "Unexpected and significant findings in comet 67P/Churyumov–Gerasimenko: an interdisciplinary view"
  59. Sol88 lies with "falsified that model." when unexpected results do not falsify a model and this is not his cult's deluded dogma.
  60. Sol88 lies with "Is the tail of a comet just gas?" which is not his cult's deluded dogma.
  61. Sol88 constantly insults M.A’Hearn by quoting him to derail from his cults deluded dogma.
  62. Sol88 emphasizes his constant lying with quoting "particularly for 67P/C-G for which refractory/volatile ratios as high as 6 have been cited" This is the detection of the ice on cmoets that must sublimate and Sol88 says does not exist !
  63. Sol88 lies with "Dead ya reckon?" when his cult's deluded dogma was born dead and is now rotting in its grave.
  64. Sol88 lies with "you and steenkh should sit down and have a chat" when every other poster here agrees that Sol88's cult's deluded dogma is dead.
  65. Sol88 lies with "Of a dead Dirtysnowball model" which is not his cult's deluded dogma.
  66. Sol88 lies with "In the mainstreams blinkered, view" which is not his cult's deluded dogma.
  67. Sol88 lies with "it’s all about the mythical ice!" when Sol88 has cited the detection of ice and papers not about ice.
  68. Sol88 lies with "what model is the correct model?"which is not his cult's deluded dogma (which has no mode!).
  69. Sol88 lies with "mainstream peer reviewed papers indeed assign more water to rocky asteroids than icy comets?" when a mainstream prediction is that primitive asteroids will have more water content than comets. Sol88 obsesses with 1 paper that supports this mainstream prediction.
  70. Sol88 idiotic obsession, insult of A'Hearn and lie by quote mining A'Hearn's paper.
  71. Sol88 lies with "Unexpected and significant findings in comet 67P/Churyumov–Gerasimenko: an interdisciplinary view" which is not his cult's deluded dogma.
  72. Sol88 lies with "The dust is charged and being electrostaticly blown of the surface." which is not his cult's deluded dogma.
  73. Sol88 lies with "ELECTRIC CURRENT. ..." which is not his cult's deluded dogma.
  74. Sol88 lies with "This is how the comet loses mass, as per" which is not his cult's deluded dogma.
  75. Sol88 lies with "jonesdave116 pathetic attempt at setting up strawmen."
  76. Sol88 lies with "Comets AND asteroids are rocky objects exchanging charge with the solar plasma."
  77. Sol88 links to an elexrric universe video about Hannes Alfven's outdated and wrong opinions on cosmology. This is not his cult's deluded dogma abut comets or even the universe !
  78. Sol88 lies about his cult's deluded dogma which was written by followers of Immanuel Velikovsky This thread is about all of the electric comet, including its origins and history.
  79. Sol88 lies with "Comets are charged rocky bodies discharging in the solar plasma."
  80. Sol88 writes a stupid "I don’t " lie about his deluded dogma which has comets being blasted from rocky planets by magical thunderbolts.
  81. Sol88 writes a stupid "and neither do you " lie when Sol88 knows the mainstream origin of comets.
  82. Sol88 lies with "The Rosetta mission blew the Dirtysnowball out of the water,"
  83. Sol88 lies with "as you state jonesdave116" when jonesdave116 only cited paper about 67P and did not write that the mainstream model is wrong.
  84. Sol88 lies with "No answer is an admission from you.." when the mainstream model is not his deluded cult's dogma.
  85. Sol88 lies with "Rocky Asteroid Bennu" which is not his cult's deluded dogma.
  86. Sol88 lies with "Pristine building blocks of how life formed on Earth?" which is not his cult's deluded dogma.
  87. Sol88 lies with "comets" which is not his cult's deluded dogma.
  88. Sol88 lies with "Steenkh, what’s the difference between a comet and an asteroid, again?" B]which is not his cult's deluded dogma.[/b]
  89. Sol88 lies with "Bunny pictures allowed now tusenfem?" when tusenfem posted an image from a telescope observing ice on comet 21P/Giacobini-Zinner !
  90. Sol88 displays his abysmal ignorance and constant lying with "Nice cross section of a Birkeland current, as described by Don Scott." when an ignorant follower parroting the delusions of a cult has no idea what a Birkeland current looks like in telescope data. Sol88 lies with "Anyhoo, steenkh, take note. ..." when Sol88 and his deluded cult ignore observations of comets.
  91. Sol88 writes a fantasy of what an ignorant follower of a deluded cult imagines.
  92. Sol88 wrote an idiotic "Looks complicated mathematically, up close." assertion when tusenfem posted an image from a telescope "with superposed the projected magnetic field data from ICE".
  93. Sol88 obsesses with Ulysses feels the brush of a comet's tail from 6 April 2000 emplacing yet again his cult's delusion that science stops whenever they want it to.

Last edited by Reality Check; Yesterday at 03:19 PM.
Reality Check is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old Yesterday, 07:21 PM   #917
Sol88
Philosopher
 
Sol88's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 6,329
That’s a pretty comprehensive list champ. I’m impressed.

__________________
“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 Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old Yesterday, 07:32 PM   #918
Sol88
Philosopher
 
Sol88's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 6,329
Originally Posted by tusenfem View Post
How can that be a Birkeland current????
It is a cross tail current, perpendicular to the magnetic field, separating the differently directed magnetic fields in either hemisphere of the tail.
So, distance form the charged object plays a role ya think?

Almost like the charged rocky body has an influence on the tail.

Maybe like I don’t and assuming, of course, that Ip [1979] is correct and that “(part) of this current can suddenly be channeled through the cometary atmosphere, in a similar way to what happens in the Earth’s tail during a substorm [Bostr¨om, 1974].

This field-aligned current can then, again, be used to increase the ionization rate near the nucleus.”

Leading, obviously, to mass loss from the nucleus.

What are your thoughts on how big the cometary curcuit is tusenfem?

If, just for arguments sake, that the comet nucleus is the focus and the anti sunward tail is part of the curcuit, where’s the other half?

Is there any helical motion in the tail?

Would it be worth investigating, for the likes of steenkh and the mob, to see if there is a “tail” behind asteroid and the like?

Even if there not in the visbsle spectrum?
__________________
“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 Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old Yesterday, 08:21 PM   #919
Reality Check
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: New Zealand
Posts: 27,421
Exclamation Years of lying about posts, posters and science continues

  1. Sol88 writes "That’s a pretty comprehensive list champ. I’m impressed." idiocy when I am documenting his endless spate of lies !
  2. Sol88 writes "distance form the charged object plays a role ya think?" idiocy in reply to tusenfem's How can that be a Birkeland current???? post.
  3. Sol88 lies with "rocky body" when comets have no rock
  4. Sol88 writes gibberish about Ip [1979] which is not his cult's deluded dogma.
  5. Sol88 lies with "mass loss from the nucleus." when Sol88 is writing about comet tails !
  6. Sol88 lies with "how big the cometary curcuit is tusenfem?" which is not his cult's deluded dogma.
  7. Sol88 lies with "where’s the other half?" which is not his cult's deluded dogma.
  8. Sol88 lies with "Is there any helical motion in the tail??" which is not his cult's deluded dogma.
  9. Sol88 lies with "Would it be worth investigating," which is his delusion that "the asteroid" has a tail and so not worth spending millions of dollars looking for.
  10. Sol88 writes "Even if there not in the visbsle spectrum?" idoicy when comet tails are visible ! We sometimes can see them with the naked eye. We can certainly see then with telescopes.
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 Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old Yesterday, 10:13 PM   #920
steenkh
Philosopher
 
steenkh's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Denmark
Posts: 6,011
Originally Posted by Sol88 View Post
Bunny pictures allowed now tusenfem?

Nice cross section of a Birkeland current, as described by Don Scott.



Anyhoo, steenkh, take note. That is a cometary tail. If we fly the same instruments “down wind” of, especially an active asteroid though any obstacle to the solar wind will set up an electric field.

This, depending on various factors will produce a “tail” on all charged rocky bodies discharging in the solar plasma.

Ice or no...

Evasion number 6. Now you ascribe the difference to “various factors”. Pray tell, what are those factors?
__________________
Steen

--
Jack of all trades - master of none!
steenkh is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Reply

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 06:16 PM.
Powered by vBulletin. Copyright ©2000 - 2020, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

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

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