The Electric Comet Theory /SAFIRE Part V

[tusenfem]

Originally Posted by Sol88

Ok, got it!

no you don't

Originally Posted by Sol88

Electron and Ion Dynamics of the Solar Wind Interaction
with a Weakly Outgassing Comet Jan Deca AND general particles of Reality Check.

Quote:

We observe a spatial separation of the cometary electrons with respect to the cometary ions, and of the solar wind electrons with respect to the solar wind protons. Cometary electrons eventually end up neutralizing the solar wind protons, and solar wind electrons eventually neutralize the cometary ions.

so apparently it gets neutralized

Originally Posted by Sol88

Anywhoo, we have spatial separation of general particles including electron (-) and Ions (+). This is required for the ELECTRIC COMET.

yes sure, and what kind of strength of electric fields does the EC idea need? what is it supposed to do? Must it be magical like your idea that the ambipolar electric field that decelerates the electrons will accelerate your negatively charged dust. Of course you can claim anything about the EC idea, and say that whatever you can nitpick agrees with this idea.

[Reality Check]

Originally Posted by Sol88

Ok, got it! ...

A blatant lie from Sol88 because Sol88 has "got" nothing for over 10 years !
The thousands of insane lies, delusions, insults, etc. since 6 July 2009 from Sol88 about his cult's electric comet and electric Sun dogma (updated 13 Feb 2020).

Sol88 cannot even get the arithmetic that a child knows - 0.6 is less the 3.0! The average measured density of comets is less than water and much less than the average measured density of asteroids.

Sol88 lied that the messed up quote he gave stated there was separation of charge when there is no "charge" or electrons or ions in the quote.
Sol88 insanity about the simple fact that comet coma are plasma and will contain separated electrons and ions because that is what a plasma is .
Sol88's usual insane lies about Sol88's demented dogma which requires a massive solar electric field and ignores real comet coma.
Sol88 spews out his insane insult of M.A’Hearn and all astronmers yet again !

Sol88's persistent insane lies about science. The Decca paper is not Sol88's demented dogma that comets are rock basted from planets by electrical discharges between planets, etc. Sol88's demented dogma does not look at the interaction between the solar wind and the comet coma which is the subject of Electron and Ion Dynamics of the Solar Wind Interaction with a Weakly Outgassing Comet

Quote:

We observe a spatial separation of the cometary electrons with respect to the cometary ions, and of the solar wind electrons with respect to the solar wind protons. Cometary electrons eventually end up neutralizing the solar wind protons, and solar wind electrons eventually neutralize the cometary ions.

[Reality Check]

Originally Posted by Sol88

...

Sol88 spews out his insane insult of M.A’Hearn and all astronmers yet again !

This is Sol88's insanity that has been repeated and noted many times over the years. Astronomers use terrestrial geology terms to describe features of comets that are known to be made up of ices and dust consolidated under gravity and cohesion to loose, porous material. "Rock" is loosely consolidated dust. "Bedrock" is a layer of ices and dust. "Boulder" is a roundish consolidation of ices and dust sitting on a surface. etc.

[Sol88]

Originally Posted by tusenfem

no you don't




so apparently it gets neutralized



yes sure, and what kind of strength of electric fields does the EC idea need? what is it supposed to do? Must it be magical like your idea that the ambipolar electric field that decelerates the electrons will accelerate your negatively charged dust. Of course you can claim anything about the EC idea, and say that whatever you can nitpick agrees with this idea.

Is the dust negatively charged tusenfem?

[Sol88]

Originally Posted by tusenfem

no you don't




so apparently it gets neutralized



yes sure, and what kind of strength of electric fields does the EC idea need? what is it supposed to do? Must it be magical like your idea that the ambipolar electric field that decelerates the electrons will accelerate your negatively charged dust. Of course you can claim anything about the EC idea, and say that whatever you can nitpick agrees with this idea.

Quote:

Cometary electrons are picked up and follow the magnetic field lines (i.e., the electron channels seen in Figure 1, left panel). Downstream of the nucleus, there is a region in which the excess of cometary electrons produces an ambipolar potential of the “wrong” sign (in contrast to the more usual excess of ions), visible at right in Figure 2(c) as a region
reaching ~ -7 eV.

A Fully Kinetic Perspective of Electron cceleration around a Weakly Outgassing Comet


That strong! Strong enough for you, tusenfem?

[Sol88]

Originally Posted by Reality Check

Sol88 spews out his insane insult of M.A’Hearn and all astronmers yet again !

This is Sol88's insanity that has been repeated and noted many times over the years. Astronomers use terrestrial geology terms to describe features of comets that are known to be made up of ices and dust consolidated under gravity and cohesion to loose, porous material. "Rock" is loosely consolidated dust. "Bedrock" is a layer of ices and dust. "Boulder" is a roundish consolidation of ices and dust sitting on a surface. etc.

So that's cometary rock!

Is not ICE a terrestrial term as well? We know what ICE is as we do ROCK!

[Sol88]

Quote:

Sol88 insanity about the simple fact that comet coma are plasma and will contain separated electrons and ions because that is what a plasma is

See

So so funny.

[jonesdave116]

Originally Posted by Sol88

Is the dust negatively charged tusenfem?

What difference would that make? How is charged dust anything to do with an idiotic, scientifically impossible bunch of woo that claims that there would be no dust?????? How is it causing EDM (lol)?

[jonesdave116]

Originally Posted by Sol88

A Fully Kinetic Perspective of Electron cceleration around a Weakly Outgassing Comet


That strong! Strong enough for you, tusenfem?

Nope, because it is doing precisely nothing related to your failed woo. No EDM (lol) remember? No rock. No discharges.

[jonesdave116]

Originally Posted by Sol88

So that's cometary rock!

Is not ICE a terrestrial term as well? We know what ICE is as we do ROCK!

There is no rock at comets. As proven. How many more pointless, inane posts are you going to make, before it finally sinks in that your woo was a complete failure? As everyone who is remotely scientifically literate knew it would be.

[jonesdave116]

Originally Posted by Sol88

See

So so funny.

Huh? That is the paper that tells you that there is no charge separation on a large scale. The clue is the bit where they talk about quasi-neutrality being maintained. What is the Debye length in the coma? That is the extent of any charge separation. It will be on the order of a few metres. Wow!

[tusenfem]

Originally Posted by Sol88

Is the dust negatively charged tusenfem?

can you read comprehensively, Sol88?

[tusenfem]

Originally Posted by Sol88

A Fully Kinetic Perspective of Electron cceleration around a Weakly Outgassing Comet


That strong! Strong enough for you, tusenfem?

Wow a full 7 eV?!?!?!?!?!?

But ... how the frag would I know what is needed in your magical EC idea?
Present a full EC idea, where it is described what is needed to do EDM, water creation, jet formation, and what have you nots in this thunderdolts phantasy. (and yes "ph" is there on purpose)

[Sol88]

Originally Posted by jonesdave116

What difference would that make? How is charged dust anything to do with an idiotic, scientifically impossible bunch of woo that claims that there would be no dust?????? How is it causing EDM (lol)?

Well, if the comet is charged and trying to seek equilibrium with the surrounding plasma it will be losing electrons!

The dust is carrying quite a few it seems!

Quote:

4.5 Charged Dust

As a rule of thumb, a dust particle collects about 700 extra electrons per unit particle volume equivalent radius (measured in μm) and unit electric potential difference between the particle surface and the surrounding plasma measured in V). This means that in the solar wind a particle of 1 μm size can have about 10^4 extra electrons.

Cometary Dust

This according to jd116 follows the cometary electrons, as per

Quote:

Note that the cometary electrons are not coupled to the cometary ions and leave the source region along the magnetic field lines that intersect the population in the vicinity of the nucleus. A spatial separation of the particles of cometary origin can be seen in the density profiles of ne,c (Figure 2(a)) and ni,c (Figure 2(b)) in the
y=0 plane.

A Fully Kinetic Perspective of Electron acceleration around a Weakly Outgassing Comet

[Sol88]

Originally Posted by jonesdave116

Huh? That is the paper that tells you that there is no charge separation on a large scale. The clue is the bit where they talk about quasi-neutrality being maintained. What is the Debye length in the coma? That is the extent of any charge separation. It will be on the order of a few metres. Wow!

All that's needed!

[Sol88]

Originally Posted by tusenfem

Wow a full 7 eV?!?!?!?!?!?

But ... how the frag would I know what is needed in your magical EC idea?
Present a full EC idea, where it is described what is needed to do EDM, water creation, jet formation, and what have you nots in this thunderdolts phantasy. (and yes "ph" is there on purpose)

No need, mainstream ARE having to fill the dots in. It's most definitely got a wiggle on since this thread started 10years ago!


Science advances one funeral at a time!

for instance,

Quote:

(c) What are comets made of?
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]. Nevertheless, there is still considerable uncertainty about even this basic parameter, not least of which is that most measurements are subject to selection effects in removing refractories from the nucleus to the coma, where they are observed as dust.

Comets: looking ahead RIP Michael F. A’Hearn

[jonesdave116]

Quote:

Well, if the comet is charged and trying to seek equilibrium with the surrounding plasma it will be losing electrons!

The dust is carrying quite a few it seems!

Which side of the comet is the dust, that shouldn't be there in your woo, coming from? Well, that would be the sunlit side, wouldn't it? That is the area that is being heated, funnily enough. And what sign will the surface dust be on the sunlit side? Have a look at Nordheim's paper. Hint: it isn't negative. Which leaves.....?

[jonesdave116]

Quote:

4.5 Charged Dust

As a rule of thumb, a dust particle collects about 700 extra electrons per unit particle volume equivalent radius (measured in μm) and unit electric potential difference between the particle surface and the surrounding plasma measured in V). This means that in the solar wind a particle of 1 μm size can have about 10^4 extra electrons.

In the coma. So, we can ignore that.

[jonesdave116]

Originally Posted by Sol88

All that's needed!

Really? Where are the figures? Do the maths. Show us how that will create non-existent, scientifically impossible EDM (lol) woo. Cannot happen. Didn't happen. So, that was another waste of pixels.

[jonesdave116]

Originally Posted by Sol88

No need, mainstream ARE having to fill the dots in. It's most definitely got a wiggle on since this thread started 10years ago!


Science advances one funeral at a time!

for instance,

Comets: looking ahead RIP Michael F. A’Hearn

And there is no rock at comets. Never been seen. Any claims that it has are therefore lies.

[jonesdave116]

Quote:

No need, mainstream ARE having to fill the dots in. It's most definitely got a wiggle on since this thread started 10years ago!

In which time more evidence that your unscientific beliefs are totally wrong has been observed. Need me to go through that evidence? Not to mention the evidence we already had which made the whole stupid idea redundant before its authors had even written their nonsense down!

[jonesdave116]

Quote:

Well, if the comet is charged and trying to seek equilibrium with the surrounding plasma it will be losing electrons!

Equilibrium with what? The surrounding plasma is quasi-neutral! And why would it need to seek equilibrium? Why is this not happening to asteroids? Including those on cometary orbits? Want a list of them? Whoops, I forgot - Indagator already posted that numerous times, and you ran away from it!

[Sol88]

Originally Posted by tusenfem

no you don't




so apparently it gets neutralized



yes sure, and what kind of strength of electric fields does the EC idea need? what is it supposed to do? Must it be magical like your idea that the ambipolar electric field that decelerates the electrons will accelerate your negatively charged dust. Of course you can claim anything about the EC idea, and say that whatever you can nitpick agrees with this idea.

Apparently so, Cometary Hydrogen Cloud


Ergo, comet MUST be mostly ice to feed this process!

But comets are not MOSTLY Ice, they are MOSTLY rock. Science evolving

Seems

Quote:

Cometary electrons eventually end up neutralizing the solar wind protons, and solar wind electrons eventually neutralize the cometary ions.

Amazing ay tusenfem.

[Sol88]

Originally Posted by jonesdave116

Equilibrium with what? The surrounding plasma is quasi-neutral! And why would it need to seek equilibrium? Why is this not happening to asteroids? Including those on cometary orbits? Want a list of them? Whoops, I forgot - Indagator already posted that numerous times, and you ran away from it!

Seems it does, champ!

But all you have is impacts, spin up and sublimation.

Much easier maths...

[Sol88]

Originally Posted by jonesdave116

And there is no rock at comets. Never been seen. Any claims that it has are therefore lies.

Poor A’Hearn being called a liar.

Shame on you jd116, shame on you.

Btw, not just A’Hearn but Martin Pätzold as well.

Quote:

The nucleus is thus a highly porous very dusty body with very little ice. The total mass loss M puts hard constraints on the models of interpretation of the observations from other instruments on Rosetta.

He used maths and all!

[jonesdave116]

Originally Posted by Sol88

Apparently so, Cometary Hydrogen Cloud


Ergo, comet MUST be mostly ice to feed this process!

But comets are not MOSTLY Ice, they are MOSTLY rock. Science evolving

Seems

Amazing ay tusenfem.

Excuse me? In which universe does that make any sense? The same universe in which Earth orbits Saturn, perhaps? Lol.
And it would be appreciated if you took your lies elsewhere. How many times do you need to be told? There is no rock at comets. Comprende? If you think otherwise, then instead of lying (as usual), actually link to the papers where it was detected.
Know what, Sol? Not only are you a troll, you are a liar. As has been repeatedly proven in this thread, and its previous incarnations. Prove me wrong. Link those papers, woo boy. What sort of rock is it? Whereabouts on the comet was it detected? By which instrument? Unless you can do that (and you cannot), then I stand by my assertion that you are nothing more than a troll and a liar.

[jonesdave116]

Originally Posted by Sol88

Seems it does, champ!

But all you have is impacts, spin up and sublimation.

Much easier maths...

Sorry? What the hell are you talking about now? Idiocy, as usual. Show me some science. You can't, because you are completely ignorant of science. N'est-ce pas? That was a rhetorical question, by the way. We all know the answer to it. Why do you not go and find an astrology forum, in which you could interact with like-minded people? In other words, other scientifically illiterate wooists? What attracts you to this place, where you are continually shown up to be totally incompetent in any relevant science? Does it not get embarrassing after a while?

[jonesdave116]

Originally Posted by Sol88

Poor A’Hearn being called a liar.

Shame on you jd116, shame on you.

Btw, not just A’Hearn but Martin Pätzold as well.

He used maths and all!

Stop lying. Why do you always lie? I think we all know - it is due to your total ignorance of any science. Where is the rock? Either admit that you are a liar, or link the papers where it was detected. You can't do the latter, so we are left with only one option; you are a liar. Just admit it. You'll feel better. We all know it already. It just needs you to acknowledge it, before you have any hope of moving on, and maybe getting some sort of counselling. Or medication. Or something.

[Sol88]

Quote:

and, not so unrealistically, the nucleus would be a highly porous stony agglomerate, essentially devoid of volitiles.

The Nucleus of Comet 67P/ChuryumovGerasimenko - Part I: The Global View – nucleus mass, mass loss, porosity and implications

Who folllowed that liar/misinformed poor soul M.A’Hearn

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].

Comets: looking ahead

or more precisely STONY AGGLOMERATION with little to no ice.


Que dummy spit by jonesdave116 on how everyone else is wrong but he correct.

[jonesdave116]

Originally Posted by Sol88

The Nucleus of Comet 67P/ChuryumovGerasimenko - Part I: The Global View – nucleus mass, mass loss, porosity and implications

Who folllowed that liar/misinformed poor soul M.A’Hearn Comets: looking ahead

or more precisely STONY AGGLOMERATION with little to no ice.


Que dummy spit by jonesdave116 on how everyone else is wrong but he correct.

There is no rock at comets. That is a lie that you keep peddling, based on no evidence whatsoever. Everything else has nothing to do with your failed woo, and has been dealt with previously, numerous times. Got any science we can discuss? Thought not.

[Sol88]

Yeah, Patzold’s paper.


What if he did not underestimate the “fallback”?



Seem hard like rock ( MUPUS), dry like rock and we measure refractory rock. Although we do see hydrogen, oxygen and carbon...

And if in out impossible woo, rock is being turned to charged dust removing excess electrons in a charge equalisatio type arrangement with double layers and electrochemistry going down....

Imagine that.

[tusenfem]

Just for fun, let's make things a bit more interesting with Kristie's latest paper:

Simultaneous Observation of Negatively and Positively Charged Nanograins at Comet 67P/Churyumov‐Gerasimenko.

[jonesdave116]

Originally Posted by Sol88

Yeah, Patzold’s paper.


What if he did not underestimate the “fallback”?



Seem hard like rock ( MUPUS), dry like rock and we measure refractory rock. Although we do see hydrogen, oxygen and carbon...

And if in out impossible woo, rock is being turned to charged dust removing excess electrons in a charge equalisatio type arrangement with double layers and electrochemistry going down....

Imagine that.

Only somebody with zero understanding of science and/ or is taking some weird drugs, could possibly even begin to believe that nonsense.

[jonesdave116]

Quote:

Seem hard like rock ( MUPUS), dry like rock and we measure refractory rock.

Nope. That is a lie. There is no rock. It has been pointed out repeatedly, with links to the relevant literature, that the measurements made by MUPUS show something that is not even close to being rock. The strength is nothing like rock. The measurement of the speed of the reverberations from the hammer strokes, show it not to be rock. Nobody sane thinks it is rock.
And we didn't measure refractory rock. We collected and analysed some DUST.

[jonesdave116]

Originally Posted by tusenfem

Just for fun, let's make things a bit more interesting with Kristie's latest paper:

Simultaneous Observation of Negatively and Positively Charged Nanograins at Comet 67P/Churyumov‐Gerasimenko.

OMG, Sol's head is going to explode!

[jonesdave116]

Quote:

And if in out impossible woo, rock is being turned to charged dust removing excess electrons in a charge equalisatio type arrangement with double layers and electrochemistry going down....

You got it right. It is impossible woo. It sure as hell isn't science!

[jonesdave116]

Quote:

What if he did not underestimate the “fallback”?

Then everybody else is wrong. All the various instrument teams that estimated the volatile loss were wrong. Including from another spacecraft. And from Earth-based observation. All the plasma simulations that match well the outgassing rates, have been fluked. The non-gravitational effects that have been modeled, and match with the observed outgassing rates, were also fluked.
Far more likely that one team are wrong, than a whole bunch of them, when the outgassing rates match models based on those calculated rates.
I'm sure they'll sort it out. And it'll be the fallback calculations. That is my 'Mystic Meg' prediction for the day.

[Reality Check]

Originally Posted by Sol88

A Fully Kinetic Perspective of Electron cceleration around a Weakly Outgassing Comet ...

Sol88's usual insanity of lying about his demented dogma which is not the relatively minor electric fields in comet coma.
The thousands of insane lies, delusions, insults, etc. since 6 July 2009 from Sol88 about his cult's electric comet and electric Sun dogma (updated 13 Feb 2020).

[Reality Check]

Originally Posted by Sol88

...

Sol88's usual insanity of lying about posts.
I wrote: Sol88 spews out his insane insult of M.A’Hearn and all astronomers yet again !
The thousands of insane lies, delusions, insults, etc. since 6 July 2009 from Sol88 about his cult's electric comet and electric Sun dogma (updated 13 Feb 2020).

[Reality Check]

Originally Posted by Sol88

See

Sol88's usual lies about posts: The thousands of insane lies, delusions, insults, etc. since 6 July 2009 from Sol88 about his cult's electric comet and electric Sun dogma (updated 13 Feb 2020).

I wrote a basic fact about plasma that Sol88 is still demented about after been told about plasma for over a decade! Sol88 insanity about the simple fact that comet coma are plasma and will contain separated electrons and ions because that is what a plasma is

tusenfem commented on Sol88's delusion that electric fields obey whatever his demented cult dreams up

Quote:

yes sure, and what kind of strength of electric fields does the EC idea need? what is it supposed to do? Must it be magical like your idea that the ambipolar electric field that decelerates the electrons will accelerate your negatively charged dust. Of course you can claim anything about the EC idea, and say that whatever you can nitpick agrees with this idea.

Sol88 asked a demented "Strong enough for you, tusenfem?" question when it is Sol88 and his insane cult that have the comets are rock, etc. dogma !
Sol88 is implying that tusenfem is included in Sol88 spews out his insane insult of M.A’Hearn and all astronomers yet again ! by taking any part of Sol88's demented dogma seriously enough to do attempt any physics from Sol88's set of ignorant delusions. This is almost impossible given that all Sol88 has is ignorant gibberish.