|
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. |
18th April 2018, 05:31 AM | #2281 |
Philosopher
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 7,273
|
As this is new thread with new lurkers, maybe you could give a layman’s rundown on the above equation?
|
__________________
“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 April 2018, 05:45 AM | #2282 |
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 |
|
18th April 2018, 05:49 AM | #2283 |
Illuminator
Join Date: Nov 2014
Posts: 4,001
|
Let me have a go ...
It says that if you've done some physics at university undergrad level, you'll immediately recognize that a) Sol88 has ~zero understanding of electricity, b) the Sun is not powered by giant Birkeland currents, c) SAFIRE (and plasma balls) have nothing to teach anyone except an EU zealot/acolyte (at least, not about the Sun). How'd I do? |
18th April 2018, 05:52 AM | #2284 |
Illuminator
Join Date: Nov 2014
Posts: 4,001
|
|
18th April 2018, 06:05 AM | #2285 |
Illuminator
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 3,197
|
|
__________________
Scientific progress goes *BOINK* -- Calvin & Hobbes twitter: @tusenfem -- Super Duper Space Plasma Physicist |
|
18th April 2018, 07:21 AM | #2286 |
The Clarity Is Devastating
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Betwixt
Posts: 20,891
|
We know hydrogen fuses in conditions of sufficient heat and pressure (such as occur in the sun).
If something other than fusion powers the sun, something must be preventing fusion from occurring in the sun. But, what? |
__________________
"*Except Myriad. Even Cthulhu would give him a pat on the head and an ice cream and send him to the movies while he ended the rest of the world." - Foster Zygote |
|
18th April 2018, 07:43 AM | #2287 |
Illuminator
Join Date: Nov 2014
Posts: 4,001
|
Originally Posted by JeanTate
I'd like to help you understand electricity, which you need to do before you can understand plasmas. So, in the equation ("Law") tusenfem posted, what do each of the letters (symbols) stand for? To help you out, here is an informative webpage (and site): Ampere-Maxwell. Note that what tusenfem wrote has only letters from the standard 26-symbol alphabet (52 if you count capitals), plus two numbers and two math symbols; on the webpage I provided a link to there are several Greek letters, and some symbols that are neither Greek nor standard alphabet (including at least one diacritic). Also note that whether something is written in bold font or not has important meaning. Looking forward to seeing you take your first steps to understanding electricity! |
18th April 2018, 08:25 AM | #2288 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 56,422
|
You have your priorities backwards. The power source for the sun is far larger, and far more significant, than any comet. Figuring that out should be easier to do, and is more important as well.
Quote:
Quote:
This is so completely wrong one wonders why you ever thought it would help your case. I suspect you just did a google search for some random plasma/electric terms, and threw up a result without actually understanding anything about it.
Quote:
|
__________________
"As long as it is admitted that the law may be diverted from its true purpose -- that it may violate property instead of protecting it -- then everyone will want to participate in making the law, either to protect himself against plunder or to use it for plunder. Political questions will always be prejudicial, dominant, and all-absorbing. There will be fighting at the door of the Legislative Palace, and the struggle within will be no less furious." - Bastiat, The Law |
|
18th April 2018, 08:33 AM | #2289 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 56,422
|
|
__________________
"As long as it is admitted that the law may be diverted from its true purpose -- that it may violate property instead of protecting it -- then everyone will want to participate in making the law, either to protect himself against plunder or to use it for plunder. Political questions will always be prejudicial, dominant, and all-absorbing. There will be fighting at the door of the Legislative Palace, and the struggle within will be no less furious." - Bastiat, The Law |
|
18th April 2018, 08:49 AM | #2290 | ||
Biomechanoid
Director of IDIOCY (Region 13) Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: New Texas (aka SOMD)
Posts: 32,151
|
|
||
__________________
-Aberhaten did it - "Which gives us an answer to our question. What’s the worst thing that can happen in a pressure cooker?" Randall Munroe -Director of Independent Determining Inquisitor Of Crazy Yapping - Aberhaten's Apothegm™ - An Internet law that states that optimism is indistinguishable from sarcasm |
|||
19th April 2018, 04:44 AM | #2291 |
Philosopher
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 7,273
|
Effect of the convective field on weakly outgassing comets A. Beth 1⋆ and M. Galand 1
Quote:
Pretty much the death knell for the dirty snowball model. What do you think Jean Tate? |
__________________
“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 April 2018, 05:55 AM | #2292 |
Illuminator
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 3,197
|
|
__________________
Scientific progress goes *BOINK* -- Calvin & Hobbes twitter: @tusenfem -- Super Duper Space Plasma Physicist |
|
19th April 2018, 07:09 AM | #2293 |
Philosopher
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 7,273
|
Suprathermal electrons near the nucleus of comet 67P/Churyumov-Gerasimenko at 3AU: Model comparisons with Rosetta data H. Madanian1, T. E. Cravens1, A. Rahmati1, R. Goldstein2, J. Burch2, A. I. Eriksson3, N. J. T. Edberg3, P. Henri4, K. Mandt2, G. Clark5, M. Rubin6, T. Broiles2, and N. L. Reedy
Quote:
Just so we are all reading from the same page. |
__________________
“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 April 2018, 07:11 AM | #2294 |
Illuminator
Join Date: Nov 2014
Posts: 4,001
|
|
19th April 2018, 07:22 AM | #2295 |
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 |
|
19th April 2018, 07:27 AM | #2296 |
Illuminator
Join Date: Nov 2014
Posts: 4,001
|
Thanks.
Just so that I'm quite clear on this: you mean what Whipple proposed in his 1950 ApJ paper (ADS link)? As a matter of curiosity, have you read that paper? If so, how well would you say that you understood it? |
19th April 2018, 10:45 AM | #2297 |
Illuminator
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 3,197
|
|
__________________
Scientific progress goes *BOINK* -- Calvin & Hobbes twitter: @tusenfem -- Super Duper Space Plasma Physicist |
|
19th April 2018, 03:19 PM | #2300 |
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 |
|
19th April 2018, 03:43 PM | #2301 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: New Zealand
Posts: 28,521
|
A "All double layers are electric fields" lie
20 April 2018: A "All double layers are electric fields" lie when replying to a "ambipolar electric field" post.
For others: Double layers have electric fields produced by separated layers of charges in plasma.. Ambipolar electric fields are the electric fields produced by not "separated layers" of charges in plasma. Ambipolar diffusion means that electrons diffuse with different velocities then ions, volumes of positive charge density can be left behind and thus electric fields. |
__________________
NASA Finds Direct Proof of Dark Matter (another observation) (and Abell 520) Electric comets still do not exist! |
|
19th April 2018, 03:53 PM | #2302 |
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 |
|
19th April 2018, 03:56 PM | #2303 |
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 |
|
19th April 2018, 04:02 PM | #2304 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: New Zealand
Posts: 28,521
|
A dumb question showing his inability to read and understand science
20 April 2018: A dumb question showing his inability to read and understand science.
I give the definition of double layers and a couple of references to ambipolar electric fields and he cannot understand that they do not have the same source of electric fields (layers versus volumes)! |
__________________
NASA Finds Direct Proof of Dark Matter (another observation) (and Abell 520) Electric comets still do not exist! |
|
19th April 2018, 05:51 PM | #2305 |
Philosopher
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 7,273
|
That’s great! We now have a new plasma expert I can ask questions of with out having to annoy tusenfem all the time.
So do the double layers found at Halley fill your criteria for double layers, rc? As found by Laakso in Electric Fields and Cold Electrons in the Vicinity of Comet Halley |
__________________
“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 April 2018, 07:18 PM | #2307 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 56,422
|
And?
The relatively simple concept which you have failed for years to grasp is that disproving one model doesn't prove your alternative. You still need evidence in favor of your model. And you don't have that. The internal structure of comets isn't exactly what people once thought, though that isn't shocking since we had never previously studied one up close. But we've known for a very long time, and these recent probes only confirm, that comets have a gas tail created by sublimating ices. We also know from these recent probes that they have low mass densities. These facts are incompatible with your model. Comets cannot be rocks blasted off the earth by lightning from Venus, because they aren't made of rock. The standard model of comets will be adjusted and refined as we gather more data with greater detail and precision. But none of it will make your model correct. We already know it's wrong, because we already have enough data to prove it's wrong. It won't magically stop being wrong. |
__________________
"As long as it is admitted that the law may be diverted from its true purpose -- that it may violate property instead of protecting it -- then everyone will want to participate in making the law, either to protect himself against plunder or to use it for plunder. Political questions will always be prejudicial, dominant, and all-absorbing. There will be fighting at the door of the Legislative Palace, and the struggle within will be no less furious." - Bastiat, The Law |
|
20th April 2018, 12:36 AM | #2308 |
Philosopher
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 7,273
|
Ok, I agree some what but...
NEW mainstream model coming up. Leaning to be more non-volatile (dusty, organics, consolidated) than volatile (icy). Plasma plays a dominate role. Way I see it, if Whipple’s model was not used as the basis for designing the Philea lander capture/restraining system and had, at least, the data from the MUPUS-PEN before hand for the designers...hindsight now. Deal’d be done. Anywhoo, we prod along with establishing the previously unexpected and somewhat surprising findings from the RPC team. Hold in there, we are nearly down to the surface. Presently at the “diamagnetic cavity’s” double layer, the one directly above 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 |
|
20th April 2018, 12:37 AM | #2309 |
Illuminator
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 3,197
|
Sweet dreams are made of this, who am I to disagree?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qeMFqkcPYcg |
__________________
Scientific progress goes *BOINK* -- Calvin & Hobbes twitter: @tusenfem -- Super Duper Space Plasma Physicist |
|
20th April 2018, 12:56 AM | #2310 |
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 |
|
20th April 2018, 01:19 AM | #2311 |
Philosopher
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 7,273
|
Your paper “A Tail Like No Other” will be an interesting new piece of the pie wrt what we have observed closer to the nucleus.
I’m very much looking forward to it being published so we can start fitting the pieces together. You know the bigger picture. |
__________________
“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 |
|
20th April 2018, 05:57 AM | #2312 |
Illuminator
Join Date: Nov 2014
Posts: 4,001
|
Cool!
Quote:
Anyway, I think Ziggurat's recent post is highly pertinent ... |
20th April 2018, 07:22 AM | #2313 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 56,422
|
That may vary from comet to comet, and will obviously change over the comet's lifetime.
Quote:
The gas tail of a comet will exhibit plasma effects, but this has been known for a long time from spectroscopy. I'm sure there's lots to discover about the details, but that requires data, and the EU folks aren't any help in this regard. Nor do these plasma effects support the EU comet theories over mainstream ones.
Quote:
And frankly, if you don't have any unexpected findings, the mission was probably a waste. |
__________________
"As long as it is admitted that the law may be diverted from its true purpose -- that it may violate property instead of protecting it -- then everyone will want to participate in making the law, either to protect himself against plunder or to use it for plunder. Political questions will always be prejudicial, dominant, and all-absorbing. There will be fighting at the door of the Legislative Palace, and the struggle within will be no less furious." - Bastiat, The Law |
|
20th April 2018, 11:33 AM | #2314 |
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 |
|
20th April 2018, 11:40 AM | #2315 |
Philosopher
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 7,273
|
Ummmm.....those “plasma effects” comprise electrical circuits not just “local” to the nucleus! Like in the ELECTRIC COMET
If we start adding up some of the spatial scales involved including the data from Ulysses, Vega 1-2, and Rosetta... No doubt gravity/mass/momentum is at play here but the very paper jean tate referenced above is comets don’t all ways play the gravity game nicely. And it’s pretty clear from the data returned the “little rockets” (cometary “jets”) have no cards in the game. |
__________________
“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 |
|
20th April 2018, 11:48 AM | #2316 |
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 |
|
20th April 2018, 11:50 AM | #2317 |
Illuminator
Join Date: Nov 2014
Posts: 4,001
|
Really interesting question, Sol88!
Let's make sure we're on the same page, OK? "the majority of missions to comet nuclei to date" - Rosetta and 67P/Churyumov–Gerasimenko, sure. What other missions, and comets, did you have in mind? "the majority of ice is of the subsurface type" - "majority": By mass? volume? something else? "ice": as in H2O? or all ices, which would include CO2? something else? "of the subsurface type" - gonna need help here! Ice is ice (unless you're referring to things like crystalline, amorphous, etc; are you?), so maybe you mean ~is not within {some distance} of the surface? "under some form of non volitile refractory/organic’s layer" - that seems to make the "subsurface" term clearer (I assume "volitile" is a typo, you mean "volatile", right?) But ... is a film of ~a few molecules' thickness such a layer? or does it have to be, say, ~100m? Oh, and why is Whipple's paper relevant? |
20th April 2018, 11:58 AM | #2318 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 56,422
|
So what? Their spatial extent may be huge (depending on what you want to include), but that's hardly the only measure of their importance, is it?
Quote:
Quote:
|
__________________
"As long as it is admitted that the law may be diverted from its true purpose -- that it may violate property instead of protecting it -- then everyone will want to participate in making the law, either to protect himself against plunder or to use it for plunder. Political questions will always be prejudicial, dominant, and all-absorbing. There will be fighting at the door of the Legislative Palace, and the struggle within will be no less furious." - Bastiat, The Law |
|
20th April 2018, 12:08 PM | #2319 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 56,422
|
Why would I be stuck with only Whipple's 1950 paper? That makes no sense.
But even in regards to that paper, you're confused. The full spectrum of light coming from the sun acts to heat the surface of the comet, not just infrared light. It's the subsequent transfer of heat from the surface to the interior which relies upon infrared radiation, since the surface isn't hot enough to radiate in the visible or above. |
__________________
"As long as it is admitted that the law may be diverted from its true purpose -- that it may violate property instead of protecting it -- then everyone will want to participate in making the law, either to protect himself against plunder or to use it for plunder. Political questions will always be prejudicial, dominant, and all-absorbing. There will be fighting at the door of the Legislative Palace, and the struggle within will be no less furious." - Bastiat, The Law |
|
20th April 2018, 12:11 PM | #2320 |
Philosopher
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 7,273
|
Ok, we’ll narrow the scope. What was the percentage of surface ice on 67P?
Yada Yada yada.... Therfore all the rest of the “ice” required of whipples model is subsurface. Under some form of consolidated non-volatile/organicly layer and ,at least visually, the consolidated “stuff” is very rocky like, so we could call it rock? |
__________________
“No rock. Any charge separation is limited. The electric field is pointing in the wrong direction. Currents are doing nothing.” Jonesdave116. “The 'electric comet' is physically IMPOSSIBLE to model using mainstream science! PERIOD! True story! End of story!” Indagator |
|
Thread Tools | |
|
|