|
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. |
19th July 2020, 05:24 PM | #41 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: New Zealand
Posts: 28,521
|
Years of lying about posts, posters and science continues
Sol88 lies with "playbook on highly conducting quasi neutral plasma.
It is textbook physics that his cult's thunderbolts require the breakdown of a dielectric medium and that plasma is highly conductive (not a dielectric medium). |
__________________
NASA Finds Direct Proof of Dark Matter (another observation) (and Abell 520) Electric comets still do not exist! |
|
19th July 2020, 05:30 PM | #42 |
Illuminator
Join Date: Nov 2014
Posts: 4,001
|
|
19th July 2020, 05:31 PM | #43 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: New Zealand
Posts: 28,521
|
Years of lying about posts, posters and science continues
A "In a highly conductive quasi neutral medium with the application of electrostatics" lie.
Sol88 explicitly stated that that the Sun has a positive charge ("The anode or +") and that comets have a negative charge ("The cathode or -"). That positive charge will always attract electrons in the solar wind. Sol88 lies that "Field aligned currents, Birkeland currents, double layers" exist in a "electrostatic quasi neutral highly conductive medium". They exist in plasma which is electromagnetically dynamic. |
__________________
NASA Finds Direct Proof of Dark Matter (another observation) (and Abell 520) Electric comets still do not exist! |
|
19th July 2020, 05:43 PM | #44 |
Philosopher
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 7,272
|
No it is the definition used by the mainstream... as per wiki Comets =
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
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 |
|
19th July 2020, 05:51 PM | #45 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: New Zealand
Posts: 28,521
|
Years of lying about posts, posters and science continues
Sol88 continues to lie about JeanTate's question and insult JeanTate ("Your brain champ".
The question is "Within The Electric Comet Theory, why is Mercury (the planet) not a comet? Ditto the Moon, Callisto, Eros (the asteroid), Phobos (the Martian moon), and Vesta (the asteroid)." A "These moons are actually discharging just like a comet" lie from Sol88. There are no electric discharges at comets, Io or Enceladus. A "Seems most things in space have a “tail”, even stars!" lie. The only things in space with a cometary tail are comets. A handful of active asteroids have tails, etc. Persist with his "comet 67P the dust is being removed electrically, from a rocky like consolidated nucleus" lies. It is "rocky like" behavior of landslides on 67P. Comets have a short period when mainstream science (not his cult delusions) says the solar wind can electrostatically transport dust and eject some dust. Sol88 lies that Mercury and Venus have tails as in cometary tails. Sol88 suggests that his cult would be deluded enough to think that planets are comets ! Will Thunderbolts also have the delusion that Mercury is a comet just because it has a sodium ion tail? [so far according to Sol88 the answered is yes] Mercury has a sodium ion tail from mainstream physics unrelated to comets. Venus has temporary "tail" events that happen when the solar wind almost stops and its atmosphere becomes teardrop shaped. Comet tails are formed by the solar wind! When a planet behaves like a comet: The tail of Venus and the weak solar wind |
__________________
NASA Finds Direct Proof of Dark Matter (another observation) (and Abell 520) Electric comets still do not exist! |
|
19th July 2020, 05:53 PM | #46 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: New Zealand
Posts: 28,521
|
Years of lying about posts, posters and science continues
"I think YOU need to supply me with YOUR definition of what a comet is" trolling when that is irrelevant
|
__________________
NASA Finds Direct Proof of Dark Matter (another observation) (and Abell 520) Electric comets still do not exist! |
|
19th July 2020, 06:10 PM | #47 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: New Zealand
Posts: 28,521
|
Years of lying about posts, posters and science continues
Sol88 lies by quote mining the the Wikipedia Comet article.
The definition of a comet is not a quote mined sentence.
Quote:
A lying "Is Mercury a comet" question when Mercury is a planet. Sol88 repeats his insult of A'Hearn and all astronomers. The abysmal insults of the deceased Michael Francis A'Hearn and all astronomers by Sol88 linking them with Sol88's dogma, etc. (no astronomer believes comets are actual rock) |
__________________
NASA Finds Direct Proof of Dark Matter (another observation) (and Abell 520) Electric comets still do not exist! |
|
19th July 2020, 06:53 PM | #48 |
Philosopher
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 7,272
|
Are comets mostly ice or mostly rock, rc?
|
__________________
“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 July 2020, 07:31 PM | #49 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: New Zealand
Posts: 28,521
|
Years of lying about posts, posters and science continues
A lying "Are comets mostly ice or mostly rock, rc?" question when Sol88 knows the answer.
For others: As far as we know, comets are mostly ice except for 2 (Tempel 1 may be 50% ice, 67P is at least 14% ice). It is yet to be determined whether Tempel 1 and 67P are atypical or typical comets. That is why A'hearn's paper had astronomers "evolving toward" (future tense) more rock than ice because Comet 67P has 33% to 14% ice. Sol88 and his cult want comets to be all rock according to his prophets with fantasies about their impossible electric discharges magically making an imaginary amount of surface ice out of rock. Anyone with eyes can read about Deep Impact ejecting subsurface water ice from Tempel 1 and making a crater showing that the surface is ice and dust, not rock. Comets: looking ahead by Michael F. A’Hearn in the themed issue ‘Cometary science after Rosetta’. Michael F. A’Hearn asked questions about mainstream ice and dust comets and later gave the science relating to those questions. (a) Where did comets form? (b) How did comets form? (c) What are comets made of?. (d) How are comets put together? (e) How do comets work? |
__________________
NASA Finds Direct Proof of Dark Matter (another observation) (and Abell 520) Electric comets still do not exist! |
|
19th July 2020, 08:43 PM | #50 |
Philosopher
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 7,272
|
|
__________________
“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 July 2020, 09:19 PM | #51 |
Philosopher
Join Date: Aug 2009
Posts: 5,265
|
Yes, it is hard. The one view has untold observations and functioning equipment and the EU view has none of that.
Again, your pet theory would allow for machines that would solve world hunger, allow (nearly) free space exploration and tons more direct applications. So, build something. Show it actually works. Create a plasma where positive and negative charges move in the same direction in an electrical field. But I guess all your theory will ever amount to is emoji's and non answers like this. |
19th July 2020, 11:01 PM | #52 |
Philosopher
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 7,272
|
Talking about solar wind and the POSITIVE SUN.
Quote:
You can start there if you'd like Lukraak_Sisser? If you are feeling real brave, you can then move onto this free space exploration...
Quote:
Would you like another serve, Lukraak_Sisser? |
__________________
“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 July 2020, 11:02 PM | #53 |
Philosopher
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 7,272
|
Sorry forgot the emoji!
|
__________________
“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 July 2020, 11:50 PM | #54 |
Philosopher
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 7,272
|
Ahhhh....
Quote:
Double Layers, the same as we see at COMET 67P's
Quote:
Folks, the ELECTRIC SUN, ELECTRIC COMET = ELECTRIC UNIVERSE! |
__________________
“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 July 2020, 12:00 AM | #55 |
Illuminator
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 3,197
|
|
__________________
Scientific progress goes *BOINK* -- Calvin & Hobbes twitter: @tusenfem -- Super Duper Space Plasma Physicist |
|
20th July 2020, 12:07 AM | #56 |
Philosopher
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 7,272
|
Talking about charged dust and the ambipolar electric field...
Quote:
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 |
|
20th July 2020, 12:10 AM | #57 |
Philosopher
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 7,272
|
|
__________________
“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 July 2020, 12:13 AM | #58 |
Philosopher
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 7,272
|
|
__________________
“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 July 2020, 01:17 AM | #59 |
Illuminator
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 3,197
|
|
__________________
Scientific progress goes *BOINK* -- Calvin & Hobbes twitter: @tusenfem -- Super Duper Space Plasma Physicist |
|
20th July 2020, 01:24 AM | #60 |
Philosopher
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 7,272
|
|
__________________
“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 July 2020, 06:45 AM | #61 |
Illuminator
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 3,197
|
|
__________________
Scientific progress goes *BOINK* -- Calvin & Hobbes twitter: @tusenfem -- Super Duper Space Plasma Physicist |
|
20th July 2020, 07:09 AM | #62 |
Illuminator
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 3,197
|
Yes, of course, ever cared to look at what a double layer does?
Or what the definition of a current is? Current in a plasma: [img]http://latex.codecogs.com/gif.latex? {\bf J} = \Sum_k n_k {\bf v}_k q_k [/img] where n_k is the density of species k, v_k is the velocity of species k and q_k is the charge of species k, and species k will be electrons and ions. In a quasi-neutral plasma moving at a certain velocity, like e.g. the solar wind, you find that J = 0. But of course you will claim that this is MHD or whatever. so, just that you can do the calculations yourself in the particle realm, we switch over to kinetic theory and find that [img]http://latex.codecogs.com/gif.latex? {\bf J}(t,{\bf x}) = \Sum q \int d^3{\bf p} {\bf v} f({\bf p}, t, {\bf x}) [/img] where you can take any particle distributino function f(p,t.x). If you want the full details on how to proceed, I will point you to Instabilities in space and laboratory plasmas by Don Melrose (where "introductory" should be taken with a grain of salt, next to that an excellent book even almost 35 years since its publication). (seems like LaTeX is still not working on the board, so attaching two gifs) |
__________________
Scientific progress goes *BOINK* -- Calvin & Hobbes twitter: @tusenfem -- Super Duper Space Plasma Physicist |
|
20th July 2020, 01:07 PM | #63 |
Illuminator
Join Date: Nov 2014
Posts: 4,001
|
|
20th July 2020, 07:26 PM | #64 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: New Zealand
Posts: 28,521
|
Years of lying about posts, posters and science continues
Sol88 replies to A lying "Are comets mostly ice or mostly rock, rc?" question when Sol88 knows the answer with more irrelevant lies.
A "Ahhhh, "dark ice"!" lie when the quote has no dark ice.. Sol88 persists with his years long "ice" lie when ice exists on comets. Sol8 lies about the "The surface of the nucleus is generally dry, dusty or rocky, suggesting that the ices are hidden beneath a surface crust several metres thick." quote. The sentence before this is "Research conducted in 2014 suggests that comets are like "deep fried ice cream", in that their surfaces are formed of dense crystalline ice mixed with organic compounds, while the interior ice is colder and less dense" (Comet - Nucleus). Sol88 lies that ice is hidden under the surface of comets when he knows there is surface ice on comets. |
__________________
NASA Finds Direct Proof of Dark Matter (another observation) (and Abell 520) Electric comets still do not exist! |
|
20th July 2020, 07:40 PM | #65 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: New Zealand
Posts: 28,521
|
Years of lying about posts, posters and science continues
A "Talking about solar wind and the POSITIVE SUN." lie.
Sol88 lies that Electron temperature of the solar wind is about his cult's delusions about the Sun that turn it into a white dwarf, fry us with fusion gamma rays, etc. It is a mainstream paper with the mainstream physics that electrons are lighter than protons (duh!) and so accelerate from the Sun more leaving the Sun with a positive charge. Sol88 lies about and obsesses with an old tethered satellite experiment yet again ! EARLY FINDINGS FROM TETHERED SATELLITE MISSION POINT TO REVAMPING OF SPACE PHYSICS THEORIEs is a 1996 experiment where "tether currents proved to be up to three times greater than existing theoretical models predicted prior to the mission.". That was a good result for using tethers to power satellites. That was mainstream science unrelated to any of his cult's delusions about the Sun or comet dogma. |
__________________
NASA Finds Direct Proof of Dark Matter (another observation) (and Abell 520) Electric comets still do not exist! |
|
20th July 2020, 07:49 PM | #66 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: New Zealand
Posts: 28,521
|
Years of lying about posts, posters and science continues
Sol88's persistent lie that double layers exist in papers that not about double layers.
Electron temperature of the solar wind has no double layers. Sol88's persistent lies that mainstream ice and comet papers are anything to do with Sol88's and his cult's debunked dogma. A Fully Kinetic Perspective of Electron Acceleration around a Weakly Outgassing Comet Sol88's persistent lies about Sol88's and his cult's debunked dogma which has no magnetic field aligned ambipolar electric field. |
__________________
NASA Finds Direct Proof of Dark Matter (another observation) (and Abell 520) Electric comets still do not exist! |
|
20th July 2020, 07:56 PM | #67 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: New Zealand
Posts: 28,521
|
Years of lying about posts, posters and science continues
Sol88 lies that Dust particles under the influence of crossed electric and magnetic fields in the sheath of an rf discharge is about his cult's debunked dogma.
This is an experiment using an rf discharge to create a dusty plasma with an external magnetic field. The results are applicable to cosmic dusty plasma in magnetic fields, dust in fusion devices, etc. Sol88's years long lies and obsession about the ambipolar electric field continues. This is textbook plasma physics. The different mobility of electrons and ions in a plasma causes an electric field to exist. Sol88's cult completely ignores science textbooks! |
__________________
NASA Finds Direct Proof of Dark Matter (another observation) (and Abell 520) Electric comets still do not exist! |
|
20th July 2020, 08:05 PM | #68 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: New Zealand
Posts: 28,521
|
Years of lying about posts, posters and science continues
A lying "ELECTRON STRAHL" question (strahl is the electron component of the solar wind).
Electrons and ions will have to obey the general electromagnetic rules. Those electrons as alresy noted obey the fact that opposite charge attract. A positive Sun attracts the strahl. That is part of Electron temperature of the solar wind which Sol88 has cited !
Quote:
Quote:
|
__________________
NASA Finds Direct Proof of Dark Matter (another observation) (and Abell 520) Electric comets still do not exist! |
|
20th July 2020, 08:09 PM | #69 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: New Zealand
Posts: 28,521
|
Years of lying about posts, posters and science continues
Sol88 lies with "YES, they do have to and they do" and citing a paper only about electrons.
Sol88 lies again by citing A Fully Kinetic Perspective of Electron Acceleration around a Weakly Outgassing Comet which is a mainstream COLOR="Red"]]ice and dust[/color] comet paper irrelevant to his debunked dogma. Sol88 lies again that ambipolar electric fields are like double layers or act as double layer. |
__________________
NASA Finds Direct Proof of Dark Matter (another observation) (and Abell 520) Electric comets still do not exist! |
|
20th July 2020, 08:16 PM | #70 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: New Zealand
Posts: 28,521
|
Years of lying about posts, posters and science continues
A lying "Any Ions moving in the opposite direction?" question.
A plasma is a partially ionized gas. A plasma contains neutral atoms, electrons and ions (with the exception of AFAIK artificial ion only and electron only plasmas). The solar wind has neutral atoms, electrons and ions. Comet coma have neutral atoms, electrons and ions. etc. High school level physics - apply an external electric field and that electric field will accelerate the ions and electrons in opposite directions ! The solar wind close to a positive Sun will have its ions and electrons accelerated in opposite directions. The resulting direction of travel will depend the speed of the charges. Electron temperature of the solar wind Sol88's lies about double layers includes persistently denying what double layers are - a layer of negative charge separated from a layer of positive charge. They have an electric field between them. That electric field will accelerate electrons and ions in opposite directions. As I recall, some extremely accelerated electrons in solar flares are attributed to double layers in magnetic reconnection. |
__________________
NASA Finds Direct Proof of Dark Matter (another observation) (and Abell 520) Electric comets still do not exist! |
|
20th July 2020, 08:37 PM | #71 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: New Zealand
Posts: 28,521
|
The usual abysmal level of lies, delusions, insults, etc. addressed since 6 July 2009
The thousands of lies, delusions, insults, etc. since 6 July 2009 from Sol88 about his cult's electric comet and electric Sun dogma.
The abysmal insults of the deceased Michael Francis A'Hearn and all astronomers by Sol88 linking them with Sol88's dogma, etc. (no astronomer believes comets are actual rock) 381 items of lies, insults, etc. from Sol88 since ~10 March 2020 P.S. The other very debunked cult dogma of an electric sun (SAFIRE) has not been mentioned in a while (CNO fusion neutrinos detected from the real Sun). Sol88's cult ignores that their ignorant fantasies cause at least hundreds of mass extinction events on Earth ! Will Thunderbolts also have the delusion that Mercury is a comet just because it has a sodium ion tail?[Sol88 implies the answer is yes by citing Mercury's magnetotail!] Sol88 continues to emphasize his cult's delusion of claiming that active asteroids are comets that turns >600,000 catalogued asteroids into comets ! Lowell Morgan who was the only actual physicist on the SAFIRE project says "EU concept is fraudulent ********", "they don't really know any physics or mathematics to speak of", "Monty and the others were making fraudulent statements" (via jonesdave116 and a Professor Dave video)
|
__________________
NASA Finds Direct Proof of Dark Matter (another observation) (and Abell 520) Electric comets still do not exist! |
|
20th July 2020, 10:31 PM | #72 |
Philosopher
Join Date: Aug 2009
Posts: 5,265
|
Watching Sol88 dig holes in his own theory is fun, but Sol88 that is not how you convince others.
1. You keep claiming that your theory works in a quasi neutral plasma, but you also claim that the sun is positive by ejecting electrons and thus the solar wind should be negative. Once again you claim nature is wrong to make your 'theory' work. 2. You claim those electrons have escaped the sun to get around the problem of them not being accelerated towards the sun. But in electrical theory, not your strong suit of course, escaped means that they are no longer within the electrical influence of the sun. So in your explanation the electrical field of the sun barely makes it past the corona. And thus is in no way able to influence comets, making the EC model pointless. Once again you show the magic needed to make the EC model work with an electric field that is both strong enough to create cometary tails and weak enough not to influence electrons at the same spot. |
21st July 2020, 12:27 AM | #73 |
Philosopher
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 7,272
|
Well j=0, MHD (your frozen in magnetic field) is no better than 1/r law for the outgassing. Nice and easy maths but not reality. In fact has lead you down the garden path...shed loads of ice MUST be there, even if it's "hidden".
The second is great for the ions but the electrons seems to be treated like the poor cousin, why? What is VERY APPARENT is the complex non linear behavior that is plasma and that Mathamajics has a bit to go to catch 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 |
|
21st July 2020, 12:33 AM | #74 |
Philosopher
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 7,272
|
|
__________________
“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 |
|
21st July 2020, 02:31 AM | #75 |
Illuminator
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 3,197
|
Well, apparently you have no idea what you are talking about, there is nothing in the post that did not include electrons.
Also, there was nothing about a frozen in magnetic field, there was only the hydrodynamic approach where both electrons and ions are seen as separate fluids moving at the same speed in the same direction, resulting in J=0. Well, you would VERY APPARENTLY be wrong. You would know if you would take the effort of actually looking at what plasma physics is doing, e.g. in the book that I cited which has a whole chapter on "Nonlinear instabilities and strong turbulence". Or you could take a look at the link that I posted earlier showing a whole bunch of text book dealing with nonlinear plasma physics. But of course it is much easier to just throw claims into the interspace without any support. Just because you cannot fathom what actual physicists are doing, and doing a great job of it, you think by playing the ISF-Trump you can discredit somehow mainstream physics (without which you would not have a computer nor internet) and thereby make the electric comet idea victorious. I know I am talking to a deaf man's ear, but the only way of showing that the electric comet idea has any merit is by actually presenting an electric comet model, the very topic of this thread. But ... that is not the reason why you are here, is it? You are here because you get off on getting people all riled up about the nonsense you so gladly write here in the forum. Actually, that's quite sad. |
__________________
Scientific progress goes *BOINK* -- Calvin & Hobbes twitter: @tusenfem -- Super Duper Space Plasma Physicist |
|
21st July 2020, 03:55 AM | #76 |
Philosopher
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 7,272
|
No, I understand you can make anything possible with math.
Crap in crap out.... You use frozen in magnetic field liberally,
Quote:
Quote:
We can argue semantics till the cows come home, still rocky like comets discharging dust electrically. You got anything on dusty plasmas, like the ones at 67P? |
__________________
“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 |
|
21st July 2020, 04:08 AM | #77 |
Philosopher
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 7,272
|
Talking about discharging...
Quote:
Wonder if jonesdave116 ever read your papers tusenfem? |
__________________
“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 |
|
21st July 2020, 04:12 AM | #78 |
Philosopher
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 7,272
|
|
__________________
“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 |
|
21st July 2020, 05:29 AM | #79 |
Philosopher
Join Date: Aug 2009
Posts: 5,265
|
Interesting. Rather than addressing the glaring mutually exclusive assumptions needed to begin making your theory work you choose to put a strawman assumption in my mouth.
So again. Is the solar wind composed of equal amounts positive and negative charges as you claim in your quasi neutral plama assumptions, in which case the sun must be neutral? Or is the sun positively charged as you also claim, in which case the solar wind must be negatively charged? And have the electrons in the solar escaped, as you claim? In which case the proposed electric field for the EC cannot reach comets when thet are active. Or does the proposed electric field extend throughout the solar system as you have claimed ? In which case you need to explain why the electrons in the solar wind do not respond to said proposed field. It's not my fault you proposed mutually exlusive explanations to solve non existent problems. |
21st July 2020, 05:43 AM | #80 |
Illuminator
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 3,197
|
No, you just do not understand the physics. You don't understand when it is okay to use MHD and when you have to go kinetic. You want to do everything kinetic, that is fine, I assume you use the general theory of releativity to calculate how long it takes for an apple to fall down from the tree to the ground, that's fine with me, but I'd rather use Newtonian physics.
Yes, card games, board games, but not so fond of computer games. Which new papers? And what should I review? Please go in depth, the whole shebang, you might get co-authorship. And while you are at it, send me a fully descriptive electric comet theory. |
__________________
Scientific progress goes *BOINK* -- Calvin & Hobbes twitter: @tusenfem -- Super Duper Space Plasma Physicist |
|
Thread Tools | |
|
|