|
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. |
4th August 2017, 12:43 PM | #81 |
Philosopher
Join Date: Feb 2015
Posts: 5,837
|
Interesting questions. If all this unobserved electrical woo were to do with the eccentricity of the orbits, why are there MBCs with comae, in almost circular orbits, not to mention the centaur, 29P Schwassmann-Wachmann (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/29P/Sc...%80%93Wachmann), and Apollo bodies without them? Such as the asteroid 4179 Toutatis (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/4179_Toutatis) which has an aphelion of > 4 AU, and a perihelion of < 1 AU.
I think the answer comes from the fact that pretty much whenever we look at one of these bodies with a coma, we see water. Which comes from ice. It isn't OH, and it isn't due to some sort of woo involving the SW ploughing into non-existent O- ions, which have(n't) been created by EDM (lol) woo. That would seem to be the crux of it, imho. Which might explain why Wally did a preview piece for the EPOXI Hartley 2 encounter on hollowscience, but then never did a follow up piece after the encounter. Given that he bases his woo on press releases, and the press releases from that mission were full of news of carbon dioxide jets, and pretty pictures of shed loads of ice around the comet, one can probably see why he went quiet. I guess there may still be a handful of the faithful, dotted around the planet, who still believe this nonsense, though. |
__________________
“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; 4th August 2017 at 12:44 PM. Reason: Forgot to put the customary 'lol' after EDM. |
|
4th August 2017, 11:41 PM | #82 |
Illuminator
Join Date: Nov 2014
Posts: 4,001
|
Re mainbelt asteroids which are also comets: let's not forget that there's a Zooniverse citizen science project which aims to discover more, and characterize the known ones better, Comet Hunters (https://www.zooniverse.org/projects/.../comet-hunters).
Given the objectives of this project, you'd think the Electric Comet people would be all over it, right? However, their involvement is ... (you fill in the blanks) It's almost as if the last thing they want to do is get involved in any actual scientific research, even when it's as simple as mouse clicks ... |
6th August 2017, 04:54 PM | #83 |
Philosopher
Join Date: Feb 2015
Posts: 5,837
|
EU Ignorance
I've had a butcher's, JT. Cheers. (for anybody in the former colonies, 'butcher's = butcher's hook = look). When do you think these eejits will ever figure out that they are talking rubbish? Mozina; we don't have to worry about. That is a given. Idiot believes in a solid iron Sun. Forget that Burke; What about the rest of the nutters? Is there anybody there who can do maths? Equations? Certainly not the idiot Thornhill. Or Talbott. Anyone else? Nope. Had a butcher's, and it seems that they are bereft of scientifically literate mouthpieces. Surprise, surprise. Surely, after nearly 3 decades of this crap, they might actually have something? Yes? Evidently not.
|
__________________
“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 |
|
7th August 2017, 01:12 AM | #84 |
Critical Thinker
Join Date: Jul 2016
Posts: 466
|
As an aside, Mozina's delusion of his predictive grandeur has grown over time and now evidently permits him to openly declare that his personal opinions "had greater predictive value than the collective "professional opinions" of all 200+ BICEP2 authors".
He also believes he is on the brink of doing it all again when it comes to the entire LIGO team's GW detections! ... I tell ya, he's become a true legend in his own lunchtime! |
8th August 2017, 11:42 PM | #85 |
Philosopher
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 7,273
|
So what is the model that mainstream use to interpret the data and observations then Fred burfle?
The dirtysnowball was bust the first time we flew a probe past a comet but why let that stop a good fairytale. I clutch it like a security blanket because the mainstream will not let it go. No lurkers or posters here have offered any alternative. The ELECTRIC COMET has offered another model to interpret the data and so far so good for the EC. Would you like to talk Jets types I,II,II? See how the dirtysnowballs(or whatever the model now is) stack up? |
__________________
“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 |
|
9th August 2017, 07:22 AM | #86 |
Illuminator
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 3,197
|
Then why do YOU keep on insisting that the mainstream model is "the dirty snowball"?
None of the mainstream proponents it making that claim, it is ONLY YOU! Why not read a paper by Martin Rubin on how he models the outgassing of a comet? Why not read the papers by other Rosetta scientists who discover all kinds of (new) stuff, improving our knowledge of how comets work? Why have your thunderdolts buddies and you not even looked at actual data from the Rosetta mission and from Vega 1, 2, Giotto etc. which are all freely available on the ESA and NASA data servers? Oh, wait, that would take you out of your security blanket, confront you with new knowledge and updated models. Heck, I expected to find X at 67P, what I found was Y, now I need to understand why Y, what makes it so (apart from Captain Pickard telling me to). That is the frakking greatness of doing scientific research. You never know what bone you get thrown. We (I) understand the basics very well, but now having this incredible amount of new data at a comet with an activity much less than we have ever visited before, makes us (me) think about things we have not thought of before, because at the earlier flybys it was not necessary to think about them. But Sol, please stay inside your security zone, singing your mantra: "mainstream is snowball, snowstream is mainball, streamball in snowmain, I'm in my safe domain". |
__________________
Scientific progress goes *BOINK* -- Calvin & Hobbes twitter: @tusenfem -- Super Duper Space Plasma Physicist |
|
9th August 2017, 01:55 PM | #87 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: New Zealand
Posts: 28,521
|
Sol88: A lie about "dirtysnowball was bust" and was a fairytale
10 August 2017 Sol88: A lie about "dirtysnowball was bust" and was a fairytale.
The evidence that comets are made of ices and dust has been gathered for over 60 years and nothing has invalidated that evidence. Comets are still less dense than water. Comets still emit gases and dust in their jets. Comets still have water ices detected on their surface. etc. etc. His comets are rocks delusion has been delusional for over 60 years with the first measurements of comet density ! 10 August 2017 Sol88: Usual ignorance about science - the first flyby of a comet was of Halley's Comet which happens to fit the description of a dirty snowball! This was the International Cometary Explorer and the 5 spacecraft in the Halley Armada in 1986. No announcement of comets not being "dirty snowballs"! No flyby mission showed changed this description. It was the ejecta from the Deep Impact mission on Comet Tempel 1 which lead to the additional "snowy dirtball" description. In 2014 other research gave us the "deep fried ice cream" description. The reality is that comets are made of ices and dust in varying proportions. We have not enough data to say which description is the best overall one and thus we use them all. 10 August 2017 Sol88: A lie of there being a electric comet model - delusions are not scientific models. = The subject of the thread is the electric comet theory so 10 August 2017 Sol88: Give the electric comet theory explanation for "Jets types I,II,II"? Start with your source for these types of jets. Given 8 years of ignorance about comets and "comets are rocks" delusions from you this will probably be mindless parroting of Thunderbolts cult dogma about electrical discharges, etc. However this Looks like Sol88's ignorance yet again ! There are type I and II tails. Comet
Quote:
|
__________________
NASA Finds Direct Proof of Dark Matter (another observation) (and Abell 520) Electric comets still do not exist! |
|
9th August 2017, 03:40 PM | #88 |
Philosopher
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 7,273
|
How'd the catch-up with Yu. V. Skorov go? Did mention the reasoning behind the statement
Quote:
Common model? My understanding of the common model is the dirtysnowball? |
__________________
“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 |
|
9th August 2017, 03:55 PM | #89 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: New Zealand
Posts: 28,521
|
Sol88: Emphasizes over 8 years of ignorance and delusions about comets
10 August 2017 Sol88: Emphasizes over 8 years of ignorance and delusions about comets with a small lie about a paper.
The paper is A comet model. I. The acceleration of Comet Encke by Whipple, F. L.; Astrophysical Journal, vol. 111, p. 375-394 (1950). This is no"dirtysnowball" model. Comets are described as dirty snowballs. The small lie is that the paper contains "dirtysnowball". |
__________________
NASA Finds Direct Proof of Dark Matter (another observation) (and Abell 520) Electric comets still do not exist! |
|
9th August 2017, 04:09 PM | #90 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: New Zealand
Posts: 28,521
|
Sol88: A lie about a quote mine from the Skorov paper
10 August 2017 Sol88: A lie about a quote mine from the Skorov paper.
He knows that the paper models comets as ices and dust as in the Whipple paper from 1950 that he cites ! 27 July 2017 Sol88: The delusion that comets are rocks is not supported by the delusion that a paper is about comets being rocks. The full quote is
Quote:
|
__________________
NASA Finds Direct Proof of Dark Matter (another observation) (and Abell 520) Electric comets still do not exist! |
|
9th August 2017, 11:14 PM | #91 |
Philosopher
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 7,273
|
Apologies, my bad.
The model is not the dirtysnowball model but "The model consists of a conglomerate made up of ices such as h2o, NH3, and other molecules volatile at room temperature, mixed with meteoritic materials." ... which we describe as "Dirtysnowballs" We're all clear now on what the mainstream model to be able to interpret the data and observations actually is?
Quote:
Anyhoo, the mainstream model has solid foundation in Whipples 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 |
|
9th August 2017, 11:58 PM | #92 |
Philosopher
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 7,273
|
Or as Franklin Anariba, PhD calls it, because like me
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 |
|
10th August 2017, 12:07 AM | #93 |
Philosopher
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 7,273
|
We need to have this minor detail cleared up so we can directly compare models based on the new observations and data (and papers) now available.
For those lurkers who are unaware of the history of the ELECTRIC COMETS idea and think it's just from a bunch of, as JD116 bangs on about, Velikovskian woo merchants and dismissed out of hand, then arm yourself with real knowledge. Here a little history on the ELECTRIC 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 |
|
10th August 2017, 12:18 AM | #94 |
Philosopher
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 7,273
|
and then you write in the comments section of Magnetic fields in massive star formation cores you hypocritical joker!
by the way, the above was predicted and expected in the ELECTRIC UNIVERSE! just maybe COMETS are an electrical phenomena and NOT icy conglomerates subliming in the warmth of the sun. Just say'n |
__________________
“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 |
|
10th August 2017, 01:10 AM | #95 |
Illuminator
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 3,197
|
As he ain't coming until November, I would say it did not go.
And I guess you assume that research stopped after 1950 and Whipple's initial model is the proof, just like in the thunderdolts community anything T&T write is not to be questioned, and goodness forbid actually tested with data. If you would actually read the Whipple paper you would find out that he says that comets consist (quoting myself): Whipple [1950] combined all spectral observations and published the now well-known “dirty snowball” model of comets. In this model the nucleus of the comet is seen as a conglomeration of volatile ices (such as H2O and CO2) bound in a solid rocky body of meteoritic material. This is the original "dirty snowball." I cannot find who actually coined the term, maybe it was Whipple, maybe not. |
__________________
Scientific progress goes *BOINK* -- Calvin & Hobbes twitter: @tusenfem -- Super Duper Space Plasma Physicist |
|
10th August 2017, 01:28 AM | #96 |
Illuminator
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 3,197
|
|
__________________
Scientific progress goes *BOINK* -- Calvin & Hobbes twitter: @tusenfem -- Super Duper Space Plasma Physicist |
|
10th August 2017, 02:16 PM | #97 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: New Zealand
Posts: 28,521
|
Sol88: A fantasy and insult about me commenting on a phys.org article (not me!)
11 August 2017 Sol88: A fantasy and insult about me commenting on a phys.org article that I have never even read !
It looks like Sol88 thinks that everyone with the username RealityCheck on the Internet is me! I have now read the article which is about real science, not his delusions about comets. Magnetic fields in massive star formation cores
Quote:
That RealityCheck asks another commenter to address the science. Which is exactly what I have been doing. Your "science" stated 8 years ago was a Thunderbolts claim that comets are rocks. The science with supporting evidence for the last 67 years is that comets are ices and dust. Thus stating that comets are rocks once is a mistake. Repeating that comets are rocks after been told their density (less than water) is an error. After being told the Deep Impact results (water + dust) it is bordering on delusion. After 8 years and especially the Rosetta mission to 67P we have a documented history of you parroting the Thunderbolts delusion. When you lie I will document that you lied. Thus that list and the additional items here. 174 items of ignorance, delusion and lies dating from 29 August 2016 to 10 August 2017 (maybe hundreds more in the last 8 years!) In the same post: General Thunderbolt cult stuff + Deafening silence emphasizing the complete ignorance of science behind the comets are rocks delusion. 11 August 2017 Sol88: A lie about "magnetic fields support the cores" being predicted by EU. EU is a bunch of fairy stories from the ignorant and deluded Thunderbolts cult who start with the stupidity of Velikovsky and add their own inane fantasies to his, e.g. this entire thread! EU has no predictions about the real world. But just in case this is not yet another delusion: 11 August 2017 Sol88: Cite the EU prediction that during mainstream star formation, "magnetic fields support the cores against the collapse induced by self-gravity". This is not the EU fairy story about z-pinches and Birkeland currents crushing gas cloud to create a star. This is the mainstream model of a molecular cloud collapsing to form stars. 11 August 2017 Sol88: The persistent 8 year old delusions about comets.. |
__________________
NASA Finds Direct Proof of Dark Matter (another observation) (and Abell 520) Electric comets still do not exist! |
|
10th August 2017, 02:29 PM | #98 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: New Zealand
Posts: 28,521
|
Sol88: Repeats the delusion that there is a dirtysnowball model
A bit of honesty ! The rest of the post is a rinse and repeat of a futile attempt to hide the completely delusional nature of the "comets are rocks" idea.
11 August 2017 Sol88: Repeats his delusions about his imaginary dirtysnowball model. The main delusion is that describing comes as dirty snowballs is a model! There is the delusion that changing the description, especially for specific comets, makes the working scientific model of comets wrong. A minor delusion is that "dirty snowball" is spelt "dirtysnowball " as he has been doing quite a lot! 11 August 2017 Sol88: Derails yet again from his delusion that comets are rocks blasted from the Earth by electrical discharges from Venus as recorded in myths. |
__________________
NASA Finds Direct Proof of Dark Matter (another observation) (and Abell 520) Electric comets still do not exist! |
|
10th August 2017, 02:42 PM | #99 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: New Zealand
Posts: 28,521
|
Sol88: A lie about an irrelevant Gooding and Allton paper
11 August 2017 Sol88: A lie about an irrelevant Gooding and Allton paper.
The paper is WATER/ROCK INTERACTIONS IN EXPERIMENTALLY SIMULATED "DIRTY SNOWBALL" AND "DIRTY ICEBALL' COMETARY NUCLEI" This paper is not about his delusion that comets are rocks. The title has mainstream descriptions of comet nuclei - note the quotes. The word "dirtyiceball" appears nowhere in the paper. The quotes which make it clear that there are not named models are missed out. |
__________________
NASA Finds Direct Proof of Dark Matter (another observation) (and Abell 520) Electric comets still do not exist! |
|
10th August 2017, 02:50 PM | #100 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: New Zealand
Posts: 28,521
|
Solo88: Cites the ignorant about comets Franklin Anariba again
11 August 2107 Solo88: Cites the ignorant about comets Franklin Anariba again making up a term for a 67 year old model !
17 July 2017 Sol88: Unthinking parroting again of an ignorant Franklin Anariba |
__________________
NASA Finds Direct Proof of Dark Matter (another observation) (and Abell 520) Electric comets still do not exist! |
|
10th August 2017, 03:00 PM | #101 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: New Zealand
Posts: 28,521
|
Sol88: A lie about directly comparing mainstream and EU models of comets
11 August 2017 Sol88: A lie about directly comparing mainstream and EU models of comets.
For lurkers: The EU has no comet model - just their ignorant and deluded stories about comets, e.g. blasted off Earth by electrical discharges in recent times. But they are not brave enough to state this clearly in any recent text. You have to waste your time and kill brain cells by watching their propaganda videos on comets! RationalWiki has the EU claim Planets give birth to comets.[12]. But deluded Wal Thornhill has blog articles where electric comet delusions are explicitly stated, e.g. The Deep Impact of Comet Theory has comets blasted from planets + are rocks + coma/tail = "plasma sheath" + electric arc discharges + electric discharge machining delusions. Sol88 hides this by not linking to any actual comet theory pages on the Thunderbolts cult web site! Sol88 has known the mainstream model of comets for 8 years. There is no "minor detail" - it is a major derailing attempt to hide the his delusion that comets are rocks. Sol88 has been denying all of the observations of comets that there have ever been and ditto for the papers (e.g. their measured density of less than water) for 8 ye4ars now! As for new observations and papers - these include the measured density of 67P being not rock, none of his electrical discharges detected, etc. Sol88 knows that the Thunderbolts cult have lied about and are totally deluded about comets but links to Thunderbolts web pages confirming those delusions ! 11 August 2017 Sol88: Links to a new (July, 2017) lying Thunderbolts "History of Electric Comet Theory: An Introduction" page. The Thunderbolts electric comet delusion starting with them being blasted of Earth is not related to a cherry picked list of sometimes irrelevant historical astronomers speculating about comets. William Gilbert, Otto von Guericke, Stephen Gray had no electric comet theory. 11 August 2017 Sol88: Links to a new (July, 2017) lying Thunderbolts "History of Electric Comet Theory: Part 2" page. The Thunderbolts electric comet delusion starting with them being blasted of Earth is not related to a cherry picked list of sometimes irrelevant historical astronomers speculating about comets. There was a speculation for a couple of centuries that comet tails were bright for the same unknown reason as aurora. This list lies by including
Two years and counting of fear of doing basic physics: 25 June 2015 Sol88: Use a impact calculator to calculate the size of the crater on a comet made of rock by the Deep Impact impactor. The parroting of the Thunderbolt cult ignorance, delusions and lies in this thread alone (continuation of a thread that is now 8 years of delusions from Sol88) 10th April 2015: The ignorance, delusions and lies in the Thunderbolts web site, videos, etc. |
__________________
NASA Finds Direct Proof of Dark Matter (another observation) (and Abell 520) Electric comets still do not exist! |
|
10th August 2017, 03:18 PM | #103 |
Philosopher
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 7,273
|
|
__________________
“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 |
|
10th August 2017, 03:43 PM | #104 |
Philosopher
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 7,273
|
You are aware that the 'dirtysnowball' model YOUR model or the icy conglomerate model cannot account for the jets of dust?
Fatal for the dirty snowball model or even the icydirtball and reading the papers that force fit the observations to the model is hilarious! So it's going to be quite the enlightenment to hear from where the fine dust is coming from. Started way back with JD116's favourite comet. Water Ice and Dust in the Innermost Coma of Comet 103P/Hartley 2
Quote:
Is near-surface ice the driver of dust activity on 67P/Churyumov-Gerasimenko
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 |
|
10th August 2017, 03:52 PM | #105 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: New Zealand
Posts: 28,521
|
Sol88: Repeats a lie of a 'dirtysnowball' model existing
|
__________________
NASA Finds Direct Proof of Dark Matter (another observation) (and Abell 520) Electric comets still do not exist! |
|
10th August 2017, 03:58 PM | #106 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: New Zealand
Posts: 28,521
|
Sol88: Insults rather than stopping digging into a pit of denial about comets
|
__________________
NASA Finds Direct Proof of Dark Matter (another observation) (and Abell 520) Electric comets still do not exist! |
|
10th August 2017, 04:12 PM | #107 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: New Zealand
Posts: 28,521
|
Sol88: A lying comparison between Protopapa, et. al. and Skorov et. al.
11 August 2017 Sol88: A lying comparison between Protopapa, et. al. and Skorov et. al.
I would say ignorant but 8 years of the comets are rocks delusion + the total irrelevancy of the papers to this thread suggest a lie. If Sol88 owns up to the ignorance of the comparison and irrelevancy of the papers then I will change this to a ignorant, irrelevant comparison. Water Ice and Dust in the Innermost Coma of Comet 103P/Hartley 2 Protopapa, et. al. (2014). Is near-surface ice the driver of dust activity on 67P/Churyumov-Gerasimenko Skorov et. al. (2017) These are papers about two different comets at two different distances from the Sun (1.06 AU and 1.3 AU). Protopapa, et. al. (2014) is measurements of Comet 103P/Hartley 2 at a heliocentric distance of 1.06 AU. Those measurements support "the concept that CO2 gas drags the water ice and dust grains from the nucleus". Skorov et. al. (2017) is a theoretical 1D model of 67P/Churyumov-Gerasimenko at a heliocentric distance of 1.3 AU. |
__________________
NASA Finds Direct Proof of Dark Matter (another observation) (and Abell 520) Electric comets still do not exist! |
|
10th August 2017, 06:02 PM | #108 |
Philosopher
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 7,273
|
Ah so Skorov et. al. (2017) is wrong cause it's only a model! Thanks for the clear up RC.
Ummm....
Quote:
Quote:
Co2 gas can drag out h2o ice and dust at
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
How much dust measured on the surface of 103P/Hartley 2? or for that matter 67P by Philea? How hard was the "supposed" ice layer that MUPUS found based on Whipples model, the common 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 |
|
10th August 2017, 07:00 PM | #109 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: New Zealand
Posts: 28,521
|
Sol88: A fantasy that Skorov et. al. (2017) was wrong because "it's only a model"
11 August 2017 Sol88: A fantasy about me writing that Skorov et. al. (2017) was wrong because "it's only a model".
11 August 2017 Sol88: A (probably) lying comparison between Protopapa, et. al. and Skorov et. al. My post says nothing about whether any of the papers are wrong. The post is that it is ignorant to the point of lying to compare a paper on comet measurements on comet 103P at 1.06 AU to a paper on a ices/dust model of 67P at 1.3 AU. If I did not think that your response would be yet more derailing from your delusion, I would give my opinion about the papers. Hint: The comets are not the same comet ! 11 August 2017 Sol88: Usual derail from his comets are rocks, etc. delusions. |
__________________
NASA Finds Direct Proof of Dark Matter (another observation) (and Abell 520) Electric comets still do not exist! |
|
10th August 2017, 10:27 PM | #111 |
Philosopher
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 7,273
|
|
__________________
“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 |
|
10th August 2017, 10:54 PM | #112 |
Philosopher
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 7,273
|
Quote:
And the dust is where? |
__________________
“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 |
|
10th August 2017, 11:38 PM | #113 |
Illuminator
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 3,197
|
|
__________________
Scientific progress goes *BOINK* -- Calvin & Hobbes twitter: @tusenfem -- Super Duper Space Plasma Physicist |
|
11th August 2017, 04:24 AM | #114 |
Philosopher
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 7,273
|
No, the new assumptions are volatiles, including supervolitiles, can not remove the ubiquitous "dust' that we see in the COMA! On the nucleus we see granular material down to instruments resolution under that was impervious the MUPUS probe (well consolidated material) AND.. it's HARD, really hard! It was presumed that it shall be ice Doesn't matter how far from the sun the nucleus is or WHERE the jets are located on the nucleus. |
__________________
“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 |
|
11th August 2017, 04:32 AM | #115 |
Philosopher
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 7,273
|
So Skorov et al are on the money
Though there is one alternative that's on offer... SIMULATION OF THE ELECTROSTATIC CHARGING OF PHILAE ON 67P/CHURYUMOV-GERASIMENKO AND OF ITS INTERACTION WITH THE DUSTS. And Electrostatic forces on grains near asteroids and comets Charged particle signatures of the diamagnetic cavity of comet 67P/Churyumov)–Gerasimenko Surface charging and electrostatic dust acceleration at the nucleus of comet 67P during periods of low activity I was thinking they may have something to do with 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 |
|
11th August 2017, 05:43 AM | #116 |
Philosopher
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 7,273
|
The Skorov papers model puts an interesting new spin on the The 2016 Feb 19 outburst of comet 67P/CG: an ESA Rosetta multi-instrument study paper.
Where all the dust come from, one would wonder? And such fine dust
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 |
|
11th August 2017, 02:44 PM | #117 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: central Illinois
Posts: 39,700
|
So Sol88,
Why don't Apollo objects show comas? |
__________________
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 |
|
11th August 2017, 03:31 PM | #118 |
Philosopher
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 7,273
|
|
__________________
“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 |
|
11th August 2017, 03:36 PM | #119 |
Philosopher
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 7,273
|
Quote:
And the dust is charged!
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 |
|
11th August 2017, 06:01 PM | #120 |
Graduate Poster
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Philippine Republic
Posts: 1,634
|
Here's a link for Sol's second quote http://iopscience.iop.org/article/10...8205/802/1/L12 Note that the "equivalent bulk density" figure missing from his quote is "< 1 kg m-3" Sol still wants us to think the barest mention of dust or charge implies rocks or lightning bolts. Sad. |
__________________
If bands were cars, Band Maid would be a pink Nissan GT-R with a Hello Kitty graphic wrap. |
|
Thread Tools | |
|
|