|
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. |
15th November 2017, 07:29 PM | #561 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: New Zealand
Posts: 28,521
|
Sol88: Idiotic repeat of an uncited quote after a source is asked for
16 November 20107 Sol88: Idiotic repeat of an uncited quote after a source is asked for
jonesdave116 wrote yesterday: So, where are you getting dust grains of umpteen hundred microns lifted off of a comet? Please answer, with references. (my emphasis added) And of course: 16 November 20107 Sol88: Lies about what he quotes as an answer to a question. The above question is in the context of dust being ejected through electrostatic charging. The previous Where is the paper saying that dust grains of many hundred microns can be levitated off of a comet? post makes this clear.
Quote:
The source is Acceleration of ions and nano dust at a comet in the solar wind |
__________________
NASA Finds Direct Proof of Dark Matter (another observation) (and Abell 520) Electric comets still do not exist! |
|
16th November 2017, 12:46 AM | #562 |
Illuminator
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 3,197
|
I don't think anyone in the community uses "complex plasma" when they mean "dusty plasma".
Anywho, at the moment their is nothing in the RPC data that shows that dust has any significant influence on the plasma dynamics around 67P. So I might as well claim (tongue-in-cheek) that around 67P there is lots of gas and plasma and no dust. |
__________________
Scientific progress goes *BOINK* -- Calvin & Hobbes twitter: @tusenfem -- Super Duper Space Plasma Physicist |
|
16th November 2017, 12:48 AM | #563 |
Illuminator
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 3,197
|
Ice ice, everywhere.
Here the latest paper by Colin Snodgrass et al. on "The Main Belt Comets and ice in the Solar System". |
__________________
Scientific progress goes *BOINK* -- Calvin & Hobbes twitter: @tusenfem -- Super Duper Space Plasma Physicist |
|
16th November 2017, 12:55 AM | #564 |
Illuminator
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 3,197
|
Well duh! NO.
Submission ... editor looking for reviewers ... at least 2 weeks if not more time for writing the review ... then make revisions and reply to reviewers ... check by editor and reviewers ... possible second round ... typesetting ... proof reading ... publication My paper is now at step 3 (at referee) This is how the real scientific world works. It is not like what your EU buddies do, just write something, dump it on their blog and claim to have a publication. |
__________________
Scientific progress goes *BOINK* -- Calvin & Hobbes twitter: @tusenfem -- Super Duper Space Plasma Physicist |
|
16th November 2017, 01:03 AM | #565 |
Illuminator
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 3,197
|
|
__________________
Scientific progress goes *BOINK* -- Calvin & Hobbes twitter: @tusenfem -- Super Duper Space Plasma Physicist |
|
16th November 2017, 04:54 AM | #566 |
Philosopher
Join Date: Feb 2015
Posts: 5,837
|
And what has any of that got to do with lifting dust from the surface? The paper you are quoting is based on a simulation for charged nanograins once they are already in the coma, outside the diamagnetic cavity. It has nothing whatever to do with electrostatic levitation of dust.
And the dust speeds measured in the Agarwal paper are nothing like 10 km/s! Why don't you actually read the papers, instead a skimming them, looking for buzzwords to cherry pick completely out of context? From the Agarwal paper:
Quote:
|
__________________
“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 |
|
16th November 2017, 05:01 AM | #567 |
Philosopher
Join Date: Feb 2015
Posts: 5,837
|
Cheers. I actually downloaded the paper, but wasn't sure about the applicability of the process at comets. Then I noticed that Eberhard Grün was a co-author, so figured that he would be well aware of the cometary environment, and that the mechanism is applicable. As he was also a co-author on the Agarwal paper, and that didn't mention any of Sol's impossible explosive levitation, I'm figuring that we can 100% consign that idea to the dustbin of loopiness, with the rest of EUs ideas.
|
__________________
“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 |
|
16th November 2017, 12:09 PM | #568 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: central Illinois
Posts: 39,700
|
|
__________________
I suspect you are a sandwich, metaphorically speaking. -Donn And a shot rang out. Now Space is doing time... -Ben Burch You built the toilet - don't complain when people crap in it. _Kid Eager Never underestimate the power of the Random Number God. More of evolutionary history is His doing than people think. - Dinwar |
|
16th November 2017, 08:55 PM | #569 |
Philosopher
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 7,270
|
|
__________________
“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 |
|
16th November 2017, 10:32 PM | #570 |
Philosopher
Join Date: Feb 2015
Posts: 5,837
|
Quote:
|
__________________
“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 |
|
17th November 2017, 12:58 AM | #571 |
Philosopher
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 7,270
|
|
__________________
“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 |
|
17th November 2017, 01:07 AM | #572 |
Philosopher
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 7,270
|
All right, let’s back up down the track here. This new, for me anyway, paper answer a question I had asked aways back in the thread.
Quote:
Seems that’s answered that! faintly remember Jonesdave116 and I getting in a bit of a quibble over it. Now, I am really interested in your paper Tusenfem. Going to have any kind of that action going on? More cherry picking and buzz words on the way... PS whoever makes the final connection between this amount of Electrical, more specifically PLASMA activity and the dust being electrodynamicaly ejected from the rock, gunna look like a complete and utter idiot, ay you mob! Fondly looks at signatures below |
__________________
“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 |
|
17th November 2017, 01:23 AM | #573 |
Philosopher
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 7,270
|
And I think me ‘ol mate Tusnefem and I can have, now, a Mano on Mano discussion on comets and DOUBLE LAYERS.
Quote:
And bugger me dead, sorry Tusenfem. Mainstream would have known since the discovery of the “singing” comet. You are coy sorta chap,
Quote:
So plasma boundaries can now be called their correct term, double layers, current carrying at that to. Ummm pretty well much what the EU mob binbanging on about for what 8-9yrs now for me a least. |
__________________
“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 |
|
17th November 2017, 01:33 AM | #574 |
Philosopher
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 7,270
|
Question for you jd116, using your vast knowledge of plasma and indeed the electric comet theory, what happens at a strongly outgassing comet, say comet 17P Holmes?
How much area in m2 is that for the outside visible coma/plasma boundary, or the double layer sheath? Starting to get into some real numbers here now, jd116. Care to have a go at your calculations for that no h2o can be made as the EU has said? Shall we wheel out old Franklin Anariba, PhD for another show round the block? What’ya Reckon Captain Swoop, Dancing David? Round 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 |
|
17th November 2017, 01:47 AM | #575 |
Philosopher
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 7,270
|
@Tusenfem
So if, hypothetically, the nucleus itself was at a more negative potential than the surrounding sw plasma, what would be the effect we should see, especially in regards to the suprathermal electron population and the ambipolar electric field/s and dust “jets’ powered from below? i’d Hazard a guess and there'd more than one double layer. The electrons appear ‘spiky’ or filamentary, the dust ‘jets’ are filamentary and fine structured along with being highly collimated. How’s sublimating ‘ice/s’ do that capper? Sorta acting in a electrical circuit analogy, as a transformer. |
__________________
“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 |
|
17th November 2017, 03:48 AM | #576 |
Philosopher
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 7,270
|
Hell, why not
Quote:
Seems its not so unknown now! from the paper
Quote:
|
__________________
“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 |
|
17th November 2017, 05:49 AM | #577 |
Illuminator
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 3,197
|
And what question is answered here, exactly? I hope you realize that "neutralize" here does not mean you are getting neutral atoms, this means charge neutrality.
As my paper only deals with the magnetic field, I don't think so. Then again. I don't know what "any kind of that action" is supposed to be. huh? |
__________________
Scientific progress goes *BOINK* -- Calvin & Hobbes twitter: @tusenfem -- Super Duper Space Plasma Physicist |
|
17th November 2017, 05:54 AM | #578 |
Illuminator
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 3,197
|
[quote=Sol88;12080128]
And I think me ‘ol mate Tusnefem and I can have, now, a Mano on Mano discussion on comets and DOUBLE LAYERS. [quote] An ambi-polar electric field is not a double layer. Could you be a little bit more obscure? Whatever you say ... I guess you mean the current driving the singing comet instability? Too bad that the ambi-polar electric field is radial, whereas the current is perpendicular to the magnetic field. You see, Sol, just putting words together does not mean you have a sentence, let alone a physical theory. Uhhh, no |
__________________
Scientific progress goes *BOINK* -- Calvin & Hobbes twitter: @tusenfem -- Super Duper Space Plasma Physicist |
|
17th November 2017, 05:55 AM | #579 |
Illuminator
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 3,197
|
|
__________________
Scientific progress goes *BOINK* -- Calvin & Hobbes twitter: @tusenfem -- Super Duper Space Plasma Physicist |
|
17th November 2017, 06:03 AM | #580 |
Illuminator
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 3,197
|
you would most likely see nothing in the supra themal electrons. you will see that the cold/thermal electrons and ions would re-arrange in order that there is no potential difference between the two
What the frak is so special about double layers? Not every electric field in a plasma is a double layer. I cannot fathom EU's fascination in putting in double layers everywhere, it must be that Alfven came up with them. Which electrons appear "spiky"? In Jan's paper there is filametation in the electron density. Those filaments are 10s of km in size, so hardly spiky, most definitely not when compared to the size of the comet. What all that other stuff is supposed to tell me, I have no idea. You forget ionization my dear. The what in the how now? |
__________________
Scientific progress goes *BOINK* -- Calvin & Hobbes twitter: @tusenfem -- Super Duper Space Plasma Physicist |
|
17th November 2017, 06:20 AM | #581 |
Illuminator
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 3,197
|
An ambi-polar electric field is not a double layer.
Am ambi-polar electric field can create a double layer if it can detach itself from the cathode and move into the plasma proper. I think Raadu (1989) explains this. The ambi-polar electric field at the comet is created by electrons that want to move out, and because they are lighter they move more quickly than the ions, and this creates an ambi-polar electric field in order to keep the electrons at bay. |
__________________
Scientific progress goes *BOINK* -- Calvin & Hobbes twitter: @tusenfem -- Super Duper Space Plasma Physicist |
|
17th November 2017, 07:49 AM | #582 |
Philosopher
Join Date: Feb 2015
Posts: 5,837
|
More idiocy. You seem to forget that the H2O is measured close to Halley and 67P. It doesn't matter what is going on thousands of kilometers away. The solar wind at a strongly outgassing comet is getting nowhere near the nucleus. ~ 4500 km at Halley. It would have been much further at Hale-Bopp.
There is nowhere near enough H+, and no O-. So, your mechanism is impossible. And we know what is causing the outgassing at 17P Holmes, because it had an outburst, after which ice grains are detected. So, your mechanism is not only impossible, but unnecessary. As has been explained numerous times. Comet 17P/Holmes in Outburst: The Near Infrared Spectrum Yang, B. et al. https://arxiv.org/pdf/0903.1317.pdf |
__________________
“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 |
|
17th November 2017, 08:06 AM | #583 |
Philosopher
Join Date: Feb 2015
Posts: 5,837
|
I'll ask Sol this again: if electrostatic levitation is the main driver of dust release, how come the coma is at its dustiest (around perihelion) when the solar wind is getting nowhere near the nucleus? This is the time when EL cannot happen, but also happens to coincide with the highest outgassing rates. Kills it dead right there, doesn't it?
And let's see what the idiot Thornhill and his sidekick have to say about the dust:
Quote:
Please explain. |
__________________
“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 |
|
18th November 2017, 03:19 PM | #584 |
Philosopher
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 7,270
|
Ya bloody drongo
Am I understanding you correctly, jonesdave116, when I say the sublimation from the heat, (long wave infrared radiation),of subsurface ice and the subsequent release of neutral molecules into the coma to be ionised by EUV light, has the power to trump the ambipolar electric fields set up and sustained via the mechanism explained in the paper. So we have energetic electron and ions doing all sorts of wonderfully complex, for the mathmagicians, behaviours that surprise scientists according to the “Ivey dust Ball”. This is achieved thru the ambipolar double layers set up that ARE coupled to the solar wind. The ELECTRIC COMET is trying to charge equalise by getting rid excess electrons, very much like in the mechanism described in the paper. The solar wind is not needed to reach the surface. These double layers very much throw a spanner into the sublimation works. This has implications for your other question jd116. |
__________________
“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 |
|
18th November 2017, 03:22 PM | #585 |
Philosopher
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 7,270
|
|
__________________
“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 |
|
18th November 2017, 03:25 PM | #586 |
Philosopher
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 7,270
|
|
__________________
“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 |
|
19th November 2017, 08:16 AM | #587 |
Philosopher
Join Date: Feb 2015
Posts: 5,837
|
As quoted by Sol:
Quote:
|
__________________
“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 |
|
19th November 2017, 08:41 AM | #588 |
Unbanned zombie poster
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Poughkeepsie, NY
Posts: 18,384
|
"The ELECTRIC COMET is trying to charge equalise by getting rid excess electrons, very much like in the mechanism described in the paper."?
Nope, the Ambipolar electric field is a result of quasinutrality, that the, solar wind, plasma and comet system are overall neutral. Expressed by your own quote from that paper earlier.
Quote:
Generally how many "excess electrons" does "The ELECTRIC COMET" notion propose such a comet has? Exactly how does the solar wind produce the correct number of "excess" ions to "charge equalise" such a comet as you assert? from the cited and quoted paper.. https://physics.aps.org/featured-art...ett.118.205101
Quote:
|
__________________
BRAINZZZZZZZZ |
|
19th November 2017, 08:51 AM | #589 |
Unbanned zombie poster
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Poughkeepsie, NY
Posts: 18,384
|
Basically translate to "Sol88 doesn't understand the paper nor "the mechanism explained in the paper"". Apparently not understanding that the ambi-polar electric field simply means the fast moving electrons tend to drag the slower moving ions with them. Just as those slower moving ions tend to slow down the fast moving electrons. As a result of, and maintaining, overall quasineutrality it actually goes against the EU or just EC (and Sol88's own) assertions. |
__________________
BRAINZZZZZZZZ |
|
19th November 2017, 09:31 AM | #590 |
Philosopher
Join Date: Feb 2015
Posts: 5,837
|
What I figured is that Sol still wants to invoke some sort of electric woo to explain the dust in the coma. My question, which he refuses to answer, was what sort of electric woo is he proposing, when the coma is at its dustiest? Given that the solar wind is not reaching the nucleus at that time, then levitation is out of the question.
As for the ambipolar field proposed by Deca, et al; that is for the coma when the comet is outgassing weakly. It is not a surface effect, and therefore cannot be used as a method for lifting grains from the surface. It certainly is of no relevance to the surface once a diamagnetic cavity forms. So, I'll ask again; what is lofting dust into the coma once a diamagnetic cavity forms, Sol? Electric pixies? |
__________________
“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 |
|
19th November 2017, 09:53 AM | #591 |
Unbanned zombie poster
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Poughkeepsie, NY
Posts: 18,384
|
Naw, Sol88's SOP appears to be just find some mainstream paper that simply mentions electro-magnetic interactions in relations to comets and then simply portray it as supportive EC and EU even if it directly refutes them (overall neutrality). Same thing with the dust assertions, find something that says dust can be levitated and assert it as supportive regardless of the specific conditions involved.
|
__________________
BRAINZZZZZZZZ |
|
19th November 2017, 11:12 AM | #592 |
Philosopher
Join Date: Feb 2015
Posts: 5,837
|
Personally, I don't recall anybody arguing about the existence, or otherwise, of ambipolar fields in the cometary ionosphere. Had they done so, I would have referred them to the fact that this is old news.
The role of electric fields in the cometary environment (1984) Cravens, T.E.; Gombosi, T.I.; Gribov, B.E. https://inis.iaea.org/search/search...._q=RN:15060349 This is a conference abstract. Note that this date is prior to the Halley encounter. So they are not only known about, but were predicted. The field is also mentioned in this paper: The electron density and temperature in the tail of comet Giacobini-Zinner (1986) Marconi, M. L. & Mendis, D. A. http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/1...004p00405/full (paywalled) And also here: Magnetohydrodynamic Models of Comet Halley (1994) Lindgren, C. J. http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1994PhDT........50L You will note that the ambipolar diffusion in that abstract is, quite obviously, happening outside the diamagnetic cavity. An ambipolar electric field is also invoked in this paper, discussing the AMPTE artificial comet experiments: Dynamics of the AMPTE artificial comet (1986) Haerendel, G. et al https://www.researchgate.net/profile...1430c807cf.pdf So Tusenfem has hardly been keeping a state secret. All the above information could have easily been found by anybody who bothered to do a search on Scholar, using the appropriate terms. |
__________________
“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 |
|
19th November 2017, 11:52 AM | #593 |
Philosopher
Join Date: Feb 2015
Posts: 5,837
|
Methinks that Sol is getting confused between ambipolar electric fields and double layers. Probably a safe assumption on my part. As Tusenfem explained in post #574, they are not the same thing. In post #569, Sol links to this paper:
The Search for Double Layers in Space Plasmas Andersson, L. & Ergun, R. E. http://lasp.colorado.edu/home/mop/fi...2Andersson.pdf Here is what they say about the formation conditions for DLs:
Quote:
In the case of the other two types, these could only occur in the coma, and so have nothing to do with dust lifting. They would also be detected by the instruments on 67P. And Tusenfem, who knows a thing or two about DLs, tells us that they weren't. |
__________________
“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 |
|
19th November 2017, 02:08 PM | #594 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: New Zealand
Posts: 28,521
|
Sol88: The repeated idiocy of writing the title only of a paper
20 November 2017 Sol88: The repeated idiocy of writing the title only of a paper.
20 November 2017 Sol88: The repeated idiocy of citing papers on comets made of ices and dust. Electron and Ion Dynamics of the Solar Wind Interaction with a Weakly Outgassing Comet (paper) (PDF) 20 November 2017 Sol88: The insanity yet again that a description in quotes is a model. The first paragraph in the paper is:
Quote:
|
__________________
NASA Finds Direct Proof of Dark Matter (another observation) (and Abell 520) Electric comets still do not exist! |
|
19th November 2017, 02:21 PM | #595 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: New Zealand
Posts: 28,521
|
Sol88: A part truth - more "cherry picking and buzz words" and lies and delusions
|
__________________
NASA Finds Direct Proof of Dark Matter (another observation) (and Abell 520) Electric comets still do not exist! |
|
19th November 2017, 02:30 PM | #596 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: New Zealand
Posts: 28,521
|
Sol88: Ambient electric fields lies about the mainstream and his comet delusions
20 November 2017 Sol88: Electric fields lies about the mainstream and his comet delusions.
The mainstream know that comets have electric fields. His comet delusions do not include any electric fields for the comet. 20 November 2017 Sol88: Deluded "double layer" lie about Deca et. al. There are no double layers in Electron and Ion Dynamics of the Solar Wind Interaction with a Weakly Outgassing Comet (paper) (PDF). 20 November 2017 Sol88: Double"plasma boundary" lie - not a double layer, not in the paper. |
__________________
NASA Finds Direct Proof of Dark Matter (another observation) (and Abell 520) Electric comets still do not exist! |
|
19th November 2017, 02:34 PM | #597 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: New Zealand
Posts: 28,521
|
Sol88: Question derailing yet again from his comet delusions
|
__________________
NASA Finds Direct Proof of Dark Matter (another observation) (and Abell 520) Electric comets still do not exist! |
|
19th November 2017, 02:37 PM | #598 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: New Zealand
Posts: 28,521
|
Sol88: A question to derail from his comet delusions but with his DL delusion
|
__________________
NASA Finds Direct Proof of Dark Matter (another observation) (and Abell 520) Electric comets still do not exist! |
|
19th November 2017, 02:44 PM | #599 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: New Zealand
Posts: 28,521
|
Sol88: Idiocy and lies about highly collimated dust jets, etc
20 November 2017 Sol88: Idiocy and lies about highly collimated dust jets, etc.
Electron and Ion Dynamics of the Solar Wind Interaction with a Weakly Outgassing Comet (paper) (PDF) by Deca et. al. The electrons are not 'spiky’ or filamentary. The electrons are not related to dust jets. A lie of 'jets" when they are jets. Dust jets are not "highly collimated". |
__________________
NASA Finds Direct Proof of Dark Matter (another observation) (and Abell 520) Electric comets still do not exist! |
|
19th November 2017, 02:50 PM | #600 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: New Zealand
Posts: 28,521
|
Sol88: Confirms how gullible he is by linking to the totally insane Thunderbolts cult
|
__________________
NASA Finds Direct Proof of Dark Matter (another observation) (and Abell 520) Electric comets still do not exist! |
|
Thread Tools | |
|
|