ISF Logo   IS Forum
Forum Index Register Members List Events Mark Forums Read Help

Go Back   International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » Science, Mathematics, Medicine, and Technology
 


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.
Closed Thread
Old 24th May 2018, 02:05 PM   #2721
Reality Check
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: New Zealand
Posts: 22,476
Thumbs down More of his lies about the Skorov et. al paper

Originally Posted by Sol88 View Post
Yu. V. Skorov
25 May 2018: More of his lies about the Skorov et. al paper.
Rosetta unravels formation of sunrise jets
Quote:
In particular, two effects proved to be decisive. Some regions on the surface are located at lower altitudes or in the shade. The first rays of sunlight reach them later. In contrast, the frost evaporates particularly efficiently from the early and strongly illuminated regions. In addition, pits and other concave structures virtually concentrate gas and dust emissions - much like an optical lens
He quotes the last sentence. Skorov et. al is not about any jets, especially from "pits and other concave structures' !
Reality Check is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 24th May 2018, 02:21 PM   #2722
Reality Check
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: New Zealand
Posts: 22,476
Thumbs down A "It's NOT what the data is saying" lying question

Originally Posted by Sol88 View Post
It's NOT what the data is saying, is it tusenfem?
25 May 2018: A "It's NOT what the data is saying" lying question.
What the data is saying:
Rosetta unravels formation of sunrise jets is about Rosetta data of jets forming during sunrise as the Sun illuminates the frosty surface exactly as predicted by frost sublimating.

This is not new. We have seen this before when small areas of frost were suddenly exposed to sunlight, e.g. though landslides. However this is frost spread over a large area being illuminated by sunrise. The first thought was that the sublimated gases would form a cloud, not the observed jets. The explanation as supported by modeling the actual surface is that it is the shape of the surface that creates the jets.

X. Shi et al. Coma morphology of comet 67P controlled by insolation over irregular nucleus, Nature Astronomy (2018). DOI: 10.1038/s41550-018-0481-5
Reality Check is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 24th May 2018, 02:31 PM   #2723
Reality Check
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: New Zealand
Posts: 22,476
Exclamation 978 items of ignorance, idiocy, delusions and lies, 6 July 2009 - 25 May 2018

More than 948 items of ignorance, idiocy (citing irrelevant mainstream papers), delusion and lies from 6 July 2009 to 10 May 2018
  1. 10 May 2018: Insanity of thanks for debunking his comet = rock delusion yet again !
  2. 10 May 2018: Back to lying to derail from his many comet delusions.
  3. 11 May 2018: Irrelevancy and the usual lies to derail from the electric comet insanity.
  4. 11 May 2018: We have the repeated lie that Skorov, et. al. is on comet jets or supports the electric comet lunacy in any way.
  5. 11 May 2018: Emphasizes that he has been lying in many of his posts for years.
  6. 11 May 2018: The Philea lander found an "ICY SURFACE" which debunks his electric comet lunacy.
  7. 11 May 2018: "Philae finding ice on the SURFACE" lie to detail from the electric comet lunacy.
  8. 14 May 2018: Repeats his "Dr. Jessica Agarwal's July 3, 2016 jet" lie.
  9. 14 May 2018: Usual lies about comets: ices have been detected, Whipple DEDUCED that there are ices (e.g. density less than water, formation in early solar system), the mainstream have been making up their own minds based on the evidence
  10. 14 May 2018: Lies by citing an ices and dust comet paper when his many comet delusions include no ices (or "minimal").
  11. 15 May 2018: Ignorant delusions about the electric comet and comet tails, e.g. his Birkeland currents lie.
  12. 15 May 2018: A lie that the "plasma" tail affects the mainstream comet model.
  13. 15 May 2018: Repeated idiocy of a ices and dust comet paper that does not support his many comet delusions.
  14. 15 May 2018: An irrelevant "dirtysnowball enduring all that heat and radiation pressure" lie.
  15. 16 May 2018: Usual ices and dust comet paper idiocy to derail from his many comet delusions.
  16. 16 May 2018: Usual idiotic questions and lies to derail from his many comet delusions.
  17. 16 May 2018: A link to the deluded Thunderbolts cult and its lies about comets.
  18. 18 May 2018: Thunderbolts cult page links to Wal Thornhill's deluded and lying "Comet Borrelly rocks core scientific beliefs" article.
  19. 17 May 2018: Links to the deluded Thunderbolts cult and the ignorant Franklin Anariba.
  20. 21 May 2018: The usual stupid "debate over the dirty snowball model" delusion.
  21. 21 May 2018: Persistent lie about "Whipple's model" by data from ices and dust comets.
  22. 21 May 2018: Insane delusion that RPC-MAG data will show that there is no sublimation on comets.
  23. 21 May 2018: Insane lie that data was forced to fit the model, i.e. faked.
  24. 21 May 2018: Delusion that "electric currents" are his electric comet delusions.
  25. 21 May 2018: Mindless parroting of the liar Wal Thornhill's insanity that tales are long and so support ignorant comet delusions.
  26. 25 May 2018: Usual lies about a ices and dust comet paper to derail from his many comet delusions.
  27. 25 May 2018: Continues to lie about the Skorov et. al paper.
  28. 25 May 2018: A delusion that he can invalidate published science when it takes deep stupidity to believe in his many comet delusions and the lies, etc. of the Thunderbolts cult.
  29. 25 May 2018: More of his lies about the Skorov et. al paper.
  30. 25 May 2018: A "It's NOT what the data is saying" lying question.
Reality Check is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 24th May 2018, 09:59 PM   #2724
Sol88
Illuminator
 
Sol88's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 3,288
Originally Posted by tusenfem View Post
Just get it in your mind, Skorov's model cannot explain how the dust gets from the surface through gas drag.
We see that dust is coming from the surface, so apparently if Skorov's model cannot explain that, then there is something wrong, and when other people CAN model the escape of the dust from the surface, then they are apparently doing something correctly, knee slapping so even.

The picture is rather clear.
For the paper
Quote:
"Outbursts can often be traced back to a small area on the surface where suddenly frozen water is exposed, for example due to a landslide," explains Dr. Holger Sierks from the MPS, OSIRIS Principal Investigator. "In the case of cometary activity at sunrise, this is different. The frost is distributed fairly evenly over the entire surface." But then why do the gas and dust emissions form jets? Why do they not create a completely homogeneous cloud?
Since when did we have fairly evenly distributed frost? We have no surface ice.

Does the frost have dust entrained, tusenfem?
__________________
"Goes without saying that nothing electrical happened." [Jonesdavid116]

"No, never electric discharges" [Tusenfem]

Usual lies about ices and dust comet papers (bedrock is not actual rock). [Reality Check, 2 May 2018]

Last edited by Sol88; 24th May 2018 at 10:01 PM.
Sol88 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 24th May 2018, 10:19 PM   #2725
Sol88
Illuminator
 
Sol88's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 3,288
Is the dust charged?

Rosetta measurements of lower hybrid frequency range electric field oscillations in the plasma environment of comet 67P 10.1002/2016GL072419
__________________
"Goes without saying that nothing electrical happened." [Jonesdavid116]

"No, never electric discharges" [Tusenfem]

Usual lies about ices and dust comet papers (bedrock is not actual rock). [Reality Check, 2 May 2018]
Sol88 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 24th May 2018, 11:44 PM   #2726
tusenfem
Master Poster
 
tusenfem's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 2,410
Originally Posted by Sol88 View Post
For the paper
I assume you mean "from the paper", and that is NOT a paper, that is a press release, the real paper is in Nature Astronomy.

Originally Posted by Sol88 View Post
Since when did we have fairly evenly distributed frost? We have no surface ice.
Guess that goes back to the water cycle on 67P.
The bolded part ("But then why do the gas and dust emissions form jets? Why do they not create a completely homogeneous cloud?") were question put in as a discussion ansatz for the rest of the piece, and actually in the first sentence of the next paragraph directly following these two questions the answer is given:

Quote:
The new study shows for the first time that mainly the unusual shape and jagged topography of the comet are responsible for this phenomenon.
Typical Sol88 type quote mining trying to put the readers of this thread into the mindset that H. Sierks only has these two questions, whereas there is a whole paper explaining why.

Quote:
Does the frost have dust entrained, tusenfem?
Maybe it does, maybe it does not, I have had no time to read the paper (although I have it) as I am preparing my presentation for the Rosetta SWT taking place next week. So, why not read the paper yourself.
__________________
20 minutes into the future
This message is bra-bra-brought to you by z-z-z-zik zak
And-And-And I'm going to be back with you - on Network 23 after these real-real-real-really exciting messages

(Max Headroom)
follow me on twitter: @tusenfem, or follow Rosetta Plasma Consortium: @Rosetta_RPC
tusenfem is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 24th May 2018, 11:46 PM   #2727
tusenfem
Master Poster
 
tusenfem's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 2,410
Originally Posted by Sol88 View Post
Is the dust charged?

Rosetta measurements of lower hybrid frequency range electric field oscillations in the plasma environment of comet 67P 10.1002/2016GL072419
Probably at least part of the dust is charged, but why would you link to Tomas' paper which has absolutely nothing to do with dust?
__________________
20 minutes into the future
This message is bra-bra-brought to you by z-z-z-zik zak
And-And-And I'm going to be back with you - on Network 23 after these real-real-real-really exciting messages

(Max Headroom)
follow me on twitter: @tusenfem, or follow Rosetta Plasma Consortium: @Rosetta_RPC
tusenfem is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 27th May 2018, 01:44 PM   #2728
JeanTate
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: Nov 2014
Posts: 1,887
And what, may I ask you Sol88, does anything in your last few posts have to with the ELECTRIC COMET model?

You know, what this thread is about.
JeanTate is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 27th May 2018, 02:18 PM   #2729
Reality Check
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: New Zealand
Posts: 22,476
Thumbs down A display of "frost/surface ice" stupidity to derail from his many comet delusions.

Originally Posted by Sol88 View Post
For the paper
28 May 2018: A display of "frost/surface ice/entrained dust" stupidity and a lie by quote mining to derail from his many comet delusions.

The paper is Coma morphology of comet 67P controlled by insolation over irregular nucleus by Shi et. al.

Frost is gases that have frozen during a comet night. The source of the gases is sublimating ices. The frost sublimates as it is exposed to sunlight. Thus "sunrise" in the press release title (Rosetta unravels formation of sunrise jets) ! As anyone with a cold winter knows, frost is distributed evenly across a surface.

Surface ices are ices that are on the surface of the comet nucleus. Their source is the deposition of molecules that were floating around from the formation of the Solar System. This happens when the comet is far from the Sun.

He highlights the questions that the paper answers. The press release also answers the quesions
Quote:
The atmosphere of Rosetta’s comet 67P/Churyumov-Gerasimenko is far from homogeneous. In addition to sudden outbursts of gas and dust, daily recurring phenomena at sunrise can be observed. In these, evaporating gas and entrained dust are concentrated to form jet-like structures. A new study, led by the Max Planck Institute for Solar System Research (MPS) in Germany and published in the journal Nature Astronomy, now identifies the rugged, duck-shaped structure of the comet as the main cause of these jets. Not only do concave regions collimate gas and dust emissions similar to an optical lens, the complex topography also provide some areas of the surface with more sunlight than others.
The jets from the frost + terrain is stated to have entrained dust thus his "entrained dust" stupidity.

More than 978 items of ignorance, idiocy (citing irrelevant mainstream papers), delusion and lies from 6 July 2009 to 25 May 2018

Sol88's comet delusions include comets are rocks; these rocks were blasted from the Earth including recently; blasting was by electrical discharges between Earth and Venus; an imaginary solar electric field charges up comets; the charge causes never detected electrical discharges; comet jets are electrical discharges; images show that comets are rocks; Birkeland currents in comets and their tails with no appropriate magnetic field; papers using bedrock to describe layers of ices support his comet are rock delusion, imaginary double layers do magic; many years of lying that ices have not been detected on comets, a "hard shell of refractory material on the outside" lie, insanity of consolidated ices and dust in papers being rock, an insane spate of lies about ices and dust papers.

18 November 2010: The lies, failures and successes of Thunderbolts Deep Impact predictions by Wal Thornhill
10th April 2015: The ignorance, delusions and lies in the Thunderbolts web site, videos, etc.
13 April 2018: A couple of the delusions in Scott's Birkeland current paper.

The electric comet delusion has at least 45 years without a scientific electric comet model or observations to support it!

Getting lose to 3 years of the 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.

Last edited by Reality Check; 27th May 2018 at 02:29 PM.
Reality Check is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 27th May 2018, 02:27 PM   #2730
Reality Check
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: New Zealand
Posts: 22,476
Thumbs down Usual lying question to derail from his many comet delusions

Originally Posted by Sol88 View Post
Is the dust charged?
28 May 2018: Usual lying question to derail from his many comet delusions.
He has cited several papers on the charging of dust and the physically possible mechanisms that charge dust in those papers will charge any comet dust.

28 May 2018: A lie that a paper is about charging dust or his totally deluded electric comet.

Rosetta measurements of lower hybrid frequency range electric field oscillations in the plasma environment of comet 67P
Quote:
Electric field measurements from cometary environments are very rare but can provide important information on how plasma waves help fashion the plasma environment. The long dwelling time of the Rosetta spacecraft close to comet 67P/Churyumov‐Gerasimenko promises to improve this state. We here present the first electric field measurements from 67P, performed by the Rosetta dual Langmuir probe instrument LAP. Measurements of the electric field from cometocentric distances of 149 and 348 km are presented together with estimates of plasma density changes. Persistent wave activity around the local H2O+ lower hybrid frequency is observed, with the largest amplitudes observed at sharp plasma gradients. We demonstrate that the necessary requirements for the lower hybrid drift instability to be operating are fulfilled. We suggest that lower hybrid waves are responsible for the creation of a warm electron population, the origins of which have been unknown so far, by heating ambient electrons in the magnetic field‐parallel direction.
This is standard "dirty snowball" science,


More than 978 items of ignorance, idiocy (citing irrelevant mainstream papers), delusion and lies from 6 July 2009 to 25 May 2018

Sol88's comet delusions include comets are rocks; these rocks were blasted from the Earth including recently; blasting was by electrical discharges between Earth and Venus; an imaginary solar electric field charges up comets; the charge causes never detected electrical discharges; comet jets are electrical discharges; images show that comets are rocks; Birkeland currents in comets and their tails with no appropriate magnetic field; papers using bedrock to describe layers of ices support his comet are rock delusion, imaginary double layers do magic; many years of lying that ices have not been detected on comets, a "hard shell of refractory material on the outside" lie, insanity of consolidated ices and dust in papers being rock, an insane spate of lies about ices and dust papers.

18 November 2010: The lies, failures and successes of Thunderbolts Deep Impact predictions by Wal Thornhill
10th April 2015: The ignorance, delusions and lies in the Thunderbolts web site, videos, etc.
13 April 2018: A couple of the delusions in Scott's Birkeland current paper.

The electric comet delusion has at least 45 years without a scientific electric comet model or observations to support it!

Getting lose to 3 years of the 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.

Last edited by Reality Check; 27th May 2018 at 02:29 PM.
Reality Check is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 29th May 2018, 04:53 PM   #2731
jonesdave116
Master Poster
 
jonesdave116's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Posts: 2,097
Quote:
Since when did we have fairly evenly distributed frost? We have no surface ice.
Lie. It is not evenly distributed, but why would it be? There is surface frost. Liar.
__________________
“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
jonesdave116 is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 29th May 2018, 05:02 PM   #2732
jonesdave116
Master Poster
 
jonesdave116's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Posts: 2,097
What is it with these cretins that causes them to lie, in order to keep their idiotic beliefs alive? Beats me. You'd have to ask the idiots involved.
Woo merchants, eh? What is it with these loons? Angry, because they were crap at science at school? Angry, because they are just plain thick? Angry, because scientifically literate people keep pointing out how stupid they are? What is it, woo boys? Let us in on the secret. Then we can all worship the idiot Thornhill. Come on loonies, let us know. Buggered if I can figure it out.
__________________
“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
jonesdave116 is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 29th May 2018, 05:12 PM   #2733
jonesdave116
Master Poster
 
jonesdave116's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Posts: 2,097
Originally Posted by JeanTate View Post
And what, may I ask you Sol88, does anything in your last few posts have to with the ELECTRIC COMET model?

You know, what this thread is about.
Damned good question, JT. Indeed, where is the the evidence for this impossible woo? Love to see it. Rather than a layman misunderstanding pretty much everything about plasma physics. In fact, is there anybody within the EU cult qualified in plasma physics? No, would be the answer to that.
Just cretins like Scott and Thornhill. Not very good at science, either of those, are they? How stupid would one need to be to believe loons like that?............... Well, I think this thread tells us that; extremely, would be the answer.
__________________
“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
jonesdave116 is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 11th June 2018, 04:11 AM   #2734
jonesdave116
Master Poster
 
jonesdave116's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Posts: 2,097
The root of a comet tail - Rosetta ion observations at comet 67P/Churyumov--Gerasimenko
Behar, E. et al
https://arxiv.org/abs/1805.03376

EDIT:
Note to Tusenfem; slight typo in your own tail excursion paper - 27/P Giacobini-Zinner should be 21/P.
__________________
“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; 11th June 2018 at 05:25 AM.
jonesdave116 is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 12th June 2018, 12:58 AM   #2735
tusenfem
Master Poster
 
tusenfem's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 2,410
Originally Posted by jonesdave116 View Post
The root of a comet tail - Rosetta ion observations at comet 67P/Churyumov--Gerasimenko
Behar, E. et al
https://arxiv.org/abs/1805.03376

EDIT:
Note to Tusenfem; slight typo in your own tail excursion paper - 27/P Giacobini-Zinner should be 21/P.
Oops, ah well, who knows the difference between a 1 and a 7 :-P

There is also a slight mistake in Etienne's paper, he gets the magnetic field direction behind the comet wrong, when citing my paper :-) but it is not of importance for his paper.
__________________
20 minutes into the future
This message is bra-bra-brought to you by z-z-z-zik zak
And-And-And I'm going to be back with you - on Network 23 after these real-real-real-really exciting messages

(Max Headroom)
follow me on twitter: @tusenfem, or follow Rosetta Plasma Consortium: @Rosetta_RPC
tusenfem is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 12th June 2018, 08:27 AM   #2736
jonesdave116
Master Poster
 
jonesdave116's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Posts: 2,097
Originally Posted by tusenfem View Post
Oops, ah well, who knows the difference between a 1 and a 7 :-P
In my experience, there is a difference between how European and British cultures write 1s and 7s. I'm guessing that is why many Euro countries put a bar through the 7 to distinguish it from a 1.
__________________
“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
jonesdave116 is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 12th June 2018, 10:33 AM   #2737
Dancing David
Penultimate Amazing
 
Dancing David's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Posts: 39,241
Originally Posted by jonesdave116 View Post
In my experience, there is a difference between how European and British cultures write 1s and 7s. I'm guessing that is why many Euro countries put a bar through the 7 to distinguish it from a 1.
Even as a USer I sure do, I learnt that in Mexico
__________________
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
Dancing David is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 12th June 2018, 12:43 PM   #2738
JeanTate
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: Nov 2014
Posts: 1,887
jonesdave116, tusenfem, Dancing David: this thread is about the ELECTRIC COMET model (or Theory). My impression is that your recent posts have nothing to do with the topic of this thread; if so, could you please stick to the topic?
JeanTate is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 13th June 2018, 04:17 AM   #2739
jonesdave116
Master Poster
 
jonesdave116's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Posts: 2,097
Originally Posted by JeanTate View Post
jonesdave116, tusenfem, Dancing David: this thread is about the ELECTRIC COMET model (or Theory). My impression is that your recent posts have nothing to do with the topic of this thread; if so, could you please stick to the topic?
Quote:
The root of a comet tail - Rosetta ion observations at comet 67P/Churyumov--Gerasimenko
Behar, E. et al
https://arxiv.org/abs/1805.03376

EDIT:
Note to Tusenfem; slight typo in your own tail excursion paper - 27/P Giacobini-Zinner should be 21/P.
Nope, seems to be about comets! Admittedly, not electric ones, but given that they don't exist...................however, Sol was particularly interested in the tail excursion, so it wasn't worth starting a new thread over.
__________________
“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; 13th June 2018 at 04:19 AM.
jonesdave116 is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 13th June 2018, 04:23 AM   #2740
JeanTate
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: Nov 2014
Posts: 1,887
Originally Posted by jonesdave116 View Post
Nope, seems to be about comets!
Right.

But this thread is not about "comets". In fact, I think Sol88 has clearly established that the relationship between "comets" and "the ELECTRIC COMET model (or Theory)" is poorly understood (let me leave it at that). And unless and until it is, posting stuff about comets is not going to help us discuss the ELECTRIC COMET model, is it?

Comets, of course, are fascinating; why not start a separate thread on them?
JeanTate is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 13th June 2018, 04:48 AM   #2741
tusenfem
Master Poster
 
tusenfem's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 2,410
I am waiting to be shown where I went wrong and how the EC is going to correct my paper (apart from the two blatant mistakes in the introduction, which are luckily irrelevant for the rest of the paper).
__________________
20 minutes into the future
This message is bra-bra-brought to you by z-z-z-zik zak
And-And-And I'm going to be back with you - on Network 23 after these real-real-real-really exciting messages

(Max Headroom)
follow me on twitter: @tusenfem, or follow Rosetta Plasma Consortium: @Rosetta_RPC
tusenfem is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 13th June 2018, 04:53 AM   #2742
jonesdave116
Master Poster
 
jonesdave116's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Posts: 2,097
Originally Posted by JeanTate View Post
Right.

But this thread is not about "comets". In fact, I think Sol88 has clearly established that the relationship between "comets" and "the ELECTRIC COMET model (or Theory)" is poorly understood (let me leave it at that). And unless and until it is, posting stuff about comets is not going to help us discuss the ELECTRIC COMET model, is it?

Comets, of course, are fascinating; why not start a separate thread on them?
I agree. However, if I did that it would only get hijacked, and swiftly turned into another 'electric comet' thread. One of Sol's fascinations has been on the tail excursion paper by Tusenfem, which isn't freely available, and hasn't yet officially appeared. He is of the mind that there will be some sort of electric woo happening in the tail. My post was merely to point him to a paper of a similar nature that may (or most likely, may not) disabuse him of said notion.
__________________
“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
jonesdave116 is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 13th June 2018, 06:51 AM   #2743
steenkh
Philosopher
 
steenkh's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Denmark
Posts: 5,380
What happened to Sol88? If he is not here, this thread does not make much sense.
__________________
Steen

--
Jack of all trades - master of none!
steenkh is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 13th June 2018, 10:54 AM   #2744
Indagator
Student
 
Join Date: May 2018
Posts: 33
Perhaps Sol88 just needs to be coxed back.

Sol88!

Evidence indicates you are the only representative of the "eu" posting on this thread at this time. Perhaps you would like to invite some of the "eu brain trust" to come help you address issues related to the electric comet, electric star, and SAFIRE (as noted by the title of this thread).

In order to properly discuss your electric comet and electric star, I have assembled a short set of simple "Yes/No" questions, designed to build some "boundary conditions" on which we may discuss these entities. Please note, several questions are included to establish your "big picture" view, while others are specific to various aspects and details of the "ec" and "es" model.

Sol88, In your opinion / To your knowledge ...

01) Could any principles/physics of the electric comet be wrong? ... Yes/No
02) Could any principles/physics of the electric star be wrong? ... Yes/No
03) Could any principles/physics of the electric universe be wrong? ... Yes/No
04) Could every aspect of the electric universe be wrong? ... Yes/No
05) Does gravity play any part in orbital mechanics? ... Yes/No
06) Does gravity play any part in star formation processes? ... Yes/No
07) Does electrostatics/electrodynamics play any part in orbital mechanics? ... Yes/No
08) Does electrostatics/electrodynamics play any part in star formation processes? ... Yes/No
09) Are stars powered by nuclear fusion occurring in the core? ... Yes/No
10) Are stars powered by nuclear fusion occurring on the surface? ... Yes/No
11) Are asteroids made of rock? ... Yes/No
12) Are asteroids made of volatile ices and dusts? ... Yes/No
13) Are comets made of rock? ... Yes/No
14) Are comets made of volatile ices and dusts? ... Yes/No
15) Is sublimation (i.e., a state change from solid to gas) a real physical process? ... Yes/No
16) Is eccentricity important to comet charging and discharging processes? ... Yes/No
17) Is electric discharge machining responsible for terrestrial geomorphology (e.g., the Grand Canyon)? ... Yes/No
18) Does a magnetic field always indicate the presence of an electric current? ... Yes/No
19) Do you know where the water ice line is for our star at this point in its life cycle? ... Yes/No
20) Do you know what a sedimentary tidal rhythmite is? ... Yes/No

Of course, other questions will follow as we discuss the "ec/es" models.

Remember, Sol88, these are simple "Yes/No" questions that require no explanation. Your explanations, and our discussions of same, will come later. All I want to do right now is establish where you stand on several "big picture" issues. I realize, your responses may not reflect those of the "eu brain trust" at the TB corporate head office. In my opinion, any differences are not necessarily a problem, I just want to know where your views align with, or diverge from the baseline of individuals like Thornhill and Scott.

I do, sincerely, hope you will take a moment to answer these simple "Yes/No" questions.

I look forward to your responses, and I thank you in advance!

PostScript - Please note, I would also like to hear from any and all "eu" supporters lurking in the shadows. Come join the discussion! Let's have some fun!

Last edited by Indagator; 13th June 2018 at 11:20 AM.
Indagator is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 13th June 2018, 05:44 PM   #2745
jonesdave116
Master Poster
 
jonesdave116's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Posts: 2,097
Quote:
16) Is eccentricity important to comet charging and discharging processes?
Oh, please Sir, can I answer? I have a list of thingies that have more eccentric orbits than 67P. I think there might be ~ 1900 of them. However, they do not behave like comets. I'm confused!
__________________
“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
jonesdave116 is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 13th June 2018, 05:49 PM   #2746
jonesdave116
Master Poster
 
jonesdave116's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Posts: 2,097
Quote:
......."eu brain trust" at the TB corporate head office.
Ahh, jeez mate, that is seriously optimistic! Brains? When did that happen?
I admire your optimism, 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
jonesdave116 is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 13th June 2018, 06:24 PM   #2747
Indagator
Student
 
Join Date: May 2018
Posts: 33
Two (of many) notable quotes that I have built and sustained my career around ...!

"Mathematics is the key and door to the sciences." --- Galileo Galilei

"Count what is countable, measure what is measurable, and what is not measurable, make measurable." --- Galileo Galilei

FYI - I have been known to change my position on a subject! Not with words, but with NUMBERS! Now, I really do hope those members of the "eu" community that choose to discuss their "ec" and "es" models with me will not disappoint the fine gentleman from Florence, Master Galilei!

Whilst waiting for "20 answers to 20 questions" from Sol88, and anyone else from the "eu" community, I would like to open some holes in a claim made by the "eu brain trust" regarding orbital eccentricity, and the physical mechanism responsible for the charging and discharging of a comet nucleus (my Question #16).

Eccentricity and the electric comet: "It's your model! You fix it!"

Sol88 (or any brave individual from the "eu" community), my understanding, according to "eu" doctrine, is that eccentricity is somehow responsible for building and dissipating charge on the nucleus of a comet. If eccentricity is at all important, please explain the following tabulated discrepancies ....!

Object ID a e i q Q
Astrd: 2001 KD55 3.344 0.6235 9.98 1.26 5.43
Astrd: 2014 LS26 3.364 0.6289 10.86 1.25 5.48
Astrd: 2000 DQ110 3.361 0.6297 58.28 1.25 5.48
Astrd: 2016 RP33 3.334 0.6343 23.04 1.22 5.45
Astrd: 2014 XN40 3.381 0.6349 14.20 1.24 5.53
Astrd: 1986 RA 3.327 0.6358 19.13 1.21 5.44
Comet: 67P/C-G 3.463 0.6414 7.05 1.24 5.69
Astrd: 2014 HW177 3.302 0.6437 13.00 1.18 5.43
Astrd: 1995 QN3 3.300 0.6450 14.79 1.17 5.43
Astrd: 2014 HY196 3.526 0.6561 42.29 1.21 5.84
Astrd: 2016 WX8 3.529 0.6572 13.29 1.21 5.85
Astrd: 2016 LA2 3.565 0.6748 17.43 1.16 5.97
Astrd: 2011 YY28 3.388 0.6765 7.35 1.10 5.68


Columns: a = Semi-major axis (AU), e = Eccentricity, i = Inclination, q = Perihelion (AU), Q = Aphelion (AU). All data extracted from the JPL SBDB. Please note, the tabulated data, above, is a trivial subset of a greater whole.

Sol88? Please explain, in mathematical terms, how eccentricity is physically involved in the charging and discharging of an electric asteroid ... I mean comet? You'll note, I've bracketed a known comet (67P) with 12 randomly selected mainstream asteroids! Help me out here! What "electrical" mechanisms are missing in your eccentricity calculations? Why is only one of 13 objects in this list deemed to be a comet? Why are the 12 mainstream asteroids inert in the same solar e-field as that surrounding 67P?

CONCLUSION: Based on simple observation, eccentricity is NOT involved in the electric comet model!!!

Prove me wrong!!! Present a mathematical model that can predict when a celestial object will become an electric comet!!! This mathematical model must use the 13 data points provided. You may also reference the JPL SBDB and any other sources to gather additional physical parameters and data that may be needed to complete your calculations! Good luck!

Sol88! Can we declare the electric comet dead yet?
Indagator is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 13th June 2018, 06:32 PM   #2748
Indagator
Student
 
Join Date: May 2018
Posts: 33
Does that make you happy, jonesdave116?

And I've got a thousand horrors waiting for anyone in the "eu" that wants to discuss their .... non-science!
Indagator is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 14th June 2018, 03:46 AM   #2749
W.D.Clinger
Illuminator
 
W.D.Clinger's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 3,420
Originally Posted by steenkh View Post
What happened to Sol88? If he is not here, this thread does not make much sense.
And when he is here, this thread makes even less sense.
W.D.Clinger is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 15th June 2018, 10:03 PM   #2750
Sol88
Illuminator
 
Sol88's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 3,288
Originally Posted by tusenfem View Post
I am waiting to be shown where I went wrong and how the EC is going to correct my paper (apart from the two blatant mistakes in the introduction, which are luckily irrelevant for the rest of the paper).
Has “A Tail Like No Other” been published yet, tusenfem?
__________________
"Goes without saying that nothing electrical happened." [Jonesdavid116]

"No, never electric discharges" [Tusenfem]

Usual lies about ices and dust comet papers (bedrock is not actual rock). [Reality Check, 2 May 2018]
Sol88 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 15th June 2018, 10:14 PM   #2751
Sol88
Illuminator
 
Sol88's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 3,288
Originally Posted by Indagator View Post
Two (of many) notable quotes that I have built and sustained my career around ...!

"Mathematics is the key and door to the sciences." --- Galileo Galilei

"Count what is countable, measure what is measurable, and what is not measurable, make measurable." --- Galileo Galilei

FYI - I have been known to change my position on a subject! Not with words, but with NUMBERS! Now, I really do hope those members of the "eu" community that choose to discuss their "ec" and "es" models with me will not disappoint the fine gentleman from Florence, Master Galilei!

Whilst waiting for "20 answers to 20 questions" from Sol88, and anyone else from the "eu" community, I would like to open some holes in a claim made by the "eu brain trust" regarding orbital eccentricity, and the physical mechanism responsible for the charging and discharging of a comet nucleus (my Question #16).

Eccentricity and the electric comet: "It's your model! You fix it!"

Sol88 (or any brave individual from the "eu" community), my understanding, according to "eu" doctrine, is that eccentricity is somehow responsible for building and dissipating charge on the nucleus of a comet. If eccentricity is at all important, please explain the following tabulated discrepancies ....!

Object ID a e i q Q
Astrd: 2001 KD55 3.344 0.6235 9.98 1.26 5.43
Astrd: 2014 LS26 3.364 0.6289 10.86 1.25 5.48
Astrd: 2000 DQ110 3.361 0.6297 58.28 1.25 5.48
Astrd: 2016 RP33 3.334 0.6343 23.04 1.22 5.45
Astrd: 2014 XN40 3.381 0.6349 14.20 1.24 5.53
Astrd: 1986 RA 3.327 0.6358 19.13 1.21 5.44
Comet: 67P/C-G 3.463 0.6414 7.05 1.24 5.69
Astrd: 2014 HW177 3.302 0.6437 13.00 1.18 5.43
Astrd: 1995 QN3 3.300 0.6450 14.79 1.17 5.43
Astrd: 2014 HY196 3.526 0.6561 42.29 1.21 5.84
Astrd: 2016 WX8 3.529 0.6572 13.29 1.21 5.85
Astrd: 2016 LA2 3.565 0.6748 17.43 1.16 5.97
Astrd: 2011 YY28 3.388 0.6765 7.35 1.10 5.68


Columns: a = Semi-major axis (AU), e = Eccentricity, i = Inclination, q = Perihelion (AU), Q = Aphelion (AU). All data extracted from the JPL SBDB. Please note, the tabulated data, above, is a trivial subset of a greater whole.

Sol88? Please explain, in mathematical terms, how eccentricity is physically involved in the charging and discharging of an electric asteroid ... I mean comet? You'll note, I've bracketed a known comet (67P) with 12 randomly selected mainstream asteroids! Help me out here! What "electrical" mechanisms are missing in your eccentricity calculations? Why is only one of 13 objects in this list deemed to be a comet? Why are the 12 mainstream asteroids inert in the same solar e-field as that surrounding 67P?

CONCLUSION: Based on simple observation, eccentricity is NOT involved in the electric comet model!!!

Prove me wrong!!! Present a mathematical model that can predict when a celestial object will become an electric comet!!! This mathematical model must use the 13 data points provided. You may also reference the JPL SBDB and any other sources to gather additional physical parameters and data that may be needed to complete your calculations! Good luck!

Sol88! Can we declare the electric comet dead yet?
G’day Indagator, welcome to the thread

Great question.

Are you able to also list the max assumed diameters for the above asteroids?
__________________
"Goes without saying that nothing electrical happened." [Jonesdavid116]

"No, never electric discharges" [Tusenfem]

Usual lies about ices and dust comet papers (bedrock is not actual rock). [Reality Check, 2 May 2018]

Last edited by Sol88; 15th June 2018 at 10:15 PM.
Sol88 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 16th June 2018, 01:19 AM   #2752
tusenfem
Master Poster
 
tusenfem's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 2,410
Originally Posted by Sol88 View Post
Has “A Tail Like No Other” been published yet, tusenfem?
apparently
__________________
20 minutes into the future
This message is bra-bra-brought to you by z-z-z-zik zak
And-And-And I'm going to be back with you - on Network 23 after these real-real-real-really exciting messages

(Max Headroom)
follow me on twitter: @tusenfem, or follow Rosetta Plasma Consortium: @Rosetta_RPC
tusenfem is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 16th June 2018, 03:35 AM   #2753
Indagator
Student
 
Join Date: May 2018
Posts: 33
Fascinating response!

Sol88! Allow me to refresh your memory, as it appears your reading comprehension is somewhat ... weak!

The success or failure of your electric comet model depends on whether or not it is physically feasible! Claims have been made! Its time to show, in mathematical terms, how your electric comet actually operates ... with whatever data and NUMBERS you deem appropriate!

First, recall this observation ...!

Quote:
"It's your model! You fix it!"
Its not my model. Convince me that your electric comet is worthy of my time and limited resources!

Next ...!

Quote:
Sol88? Please explain, in mathematical terms, how eccentricity is physically involved in the charging and discharging of an electric asteroid ... I mean comet!
If you wish to suddenly introduce physical dimensions, go right ahead! And then tell me, in mathematical terms, how eccentricity and an objects dimensions are physically involved in the charging and discharging of an electric asteroid!

And finally ...!

Quote:
Present a mathematical model that can predict when a celestial object will become an electric comet!!! This mathematical model must use the 13 data points provided. You may also reference the JPL SBDB and any other sources to gather additional physical parameters and data that may be needed to complete your calculations! Good luck!
Again, if you suddenly feel that physical dimensions will fix your model, please, show me how dimensions, or rotation rates, or any other physical parameters from the JPL SBDB and the thousands of other readily available data sources will make it possible to predict when a celestial object becomes an "eu" electric object!

Remember! This is all about you and YOUR model! Convince me that your electric comet has merit! Otherwise we will declare it dead! OK? Don't waste my time with deflections! What your question says to me is that you haven't a clue how an electric comet could operate, just like everyone else from the "eu" that I have dealt with to date! Prove me wrong! Make me proud! Be better than the rest!

Remember!

It's your model! You fix it! Dig?

PostScript 1 - As it turns out, you don't need specific physical dimensions for the 13 objects! Just build your mathematical model in such a way that above or below a certain size the object will remain inert, regardless of its eccentricity! These are the first constraints you need to build into your model! It also gives us a way to validate or falsify your model! And don't be afraid to ask your "eu" buddies to come give you a hand in building a mathematical model that does not violate basic laws of physics! OK? Remember, this model has to represent a feasible, physical, economically exploitable object!

PostScript 2 - When might ye provide answers to my simple "Yes/No" questions listed above? There is much to discuss!

PostScript 3 - When might ye get back to answering some of Jean Tate's excellent questions?

And again, Sol88, thanks in advance! I am so looking forward to seeing how your mathematical model evolves and grows here at the ISF!
Indagator is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 16th June 2018, 07:23 AM   #2754
jonesdave116
Master Poster
 
jonesdave116's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Posts: 2,097
Originally Posted by tusenfem View Post
apparently
Indeedy:

https://www.aanda.org/articles/aa/ab...a32198-17.html
__________________
“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
jonesdave116 is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 16th June 2018, 07:40 AM   #2755
jonesdave116
Master Poster
 
jonesdave116's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Posts: 2,097
Quote:
Are you able to also list the max assumed diameters for the above asteroids?
As Indagator said, why would the physical dimensions matter? As a reference point, here are some rough cometary dimensions:

67P: 4 km x 2 km
Halley: 15 km x 8 km
Hale-Bopp: 40-80 km
Hartley 2: 2 km x 1 km
Tempel 1: 7 km x 5 km
__________________
“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
jonesdave116 is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 16th June 2018, 05:32 PM   #2756
Sol88
Illuminator
 
Sol88's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 3,288
Originally Posted by tusenfem View Post
apparently

Gefeliciteerd!
__________________
"Goes without saying that nothing electrical happened." [Jonesdavid116]

"No, never electric discharges" [Tusenfem]

Usual lies about ices and dust comet papers (bedrock is not actual rock). [Reality Check, 2 May 2018]
Sol88 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 16th June 2018, 09:32 PM   #2757
Sol88
Illuminator
 
Sol88's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 3,288
Originally Posted by Indagator View Post
Fascinating response!

Sol88! Allow me to refresh your memory, as it appears your reading comprehension is somewhat ... weak!

The success or failure of your electric comet model depends on whether or not it is physically feasible! Claims have been made! Its time to show, in mathematical terms, how your electric comet actually operates ... with whatever data and NUMBERS you deem appropriate!

First, recall this observation ...!



Its not my model. Convince me that your electric comet is worthy of my time and limited resources!

Next ...!

SNIPPED

Remember! This is all about you and YOUR model! Convince me that your electric comet has merit! Otherwise we will declare it dead! OK? Don't waste my time with deflections! What your question says to me is that you haven't a clue how an electric comet could operate, just like everyone else from the "eu" that I have dealt with to date! Prove me wrong! Make me proud! Be better than the rest!

Remember!

It's your model! You fix it! Dig?
ok then from the new paper by A tail like no other - The RPC-MAG view of Rosetta’s tail excursion at comet 67P/Churyumov–Gerasimenko M.Volwerk et al.

Quote:
Quote:
Rosetta from the nucleus, and thus kinetic effects on the structure
of the tail should be expected and not the typical MHD-type
of tail structure.
@tusenfem, would you like to fill Indagator in on the details? We've already covered this ground I think. Is this correct tusenfem?

__________________
"Goes without saying that nothing electrical happened." [Jonesdavid116]

"No, never electric discharges" [Tusenfem]

Usual lies about ices and dust comet papers (bedrock is not actual rock). [Reality Check, 2 May 2018]

Last edited by Sol88; 16th June 2018 at 09:37 PM.
Sol88 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 17th June 2018, 12:05 AM   #2758
Sol88
Illuminator
 
Sol88's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 3,288
Originally Posted by tusenfem View Post
Indeed wtf, because, as usual you don't answer my questions, but come up with vaguely related random quotes.

So, once more:
Is there any reason you can come up with why ideal MHD would (not) hold for Birkeland currents?
Do you actually know what (ideal) MHD is, and what the restricting parameters are for (ideal) MHD, and do you think that field aligned currents are affected by that?

Indeed, field aligned electric fields cannot exist in ideal MHD (do you know why?), but does that mean that field aligned currents cannot exist in ideal MHD (if yes, why not, if no why?).

You have a completely twisted idea of what plasma physicists are doing (unsurprisinly), you really think we are still in the 1950s/60s around the birth of Alfven's MHD, and we have not developed any further. Well, that is also not surprising, as you keep on insisting that we still assume Whipple's 1950s model for a comet.

I guess I can only come to the conclusion that YOU Sol88 were not borne in 1988 but actually are from the 1950s and you have not developed any further.
Now maybe we could talk MHD and wether it holds...oh. Never mind.

Quote:
During the tail excursion the magnetic field strength around comet 67P was B ≈ 10 nT; this means that when water ions are picked up by the magnetic eld of the solar wind at v ≈ 350 km s−1, the gyro radius of these ions is ρi ≈ 6000 km. This radius is much larger than the radial distance covered by Rosetta from the nucleus
Quote:
The clock-angle φc of the magnetic field in the tail shows a rotation of the field, which is slowly moving down-tail.
intriguing!!

A Tail Like No Other
__________________
"Goes without saying that nothing electrical happened." [Jonesdavid116]

"No, never electric discharges" [Tusenfem]

Usual lies about ices and dust comet papers (bedrock is not actual rock). [Reality Check, 2 May 2018]

Last edited by Sol88; 17th June 2018 at 12:10 AM.
Sol88 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 17th June 2018, 01:10 AM   #2759
tusenfem
Master Poster
 
tusenfem's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 2,410
Originally Posted by Sol88 View Post
ok then from the new paper by A tail like no other - The RPC-MAG view of Rosetta’s tail excursion at comet 67P/Churyumov–Gerasimenko M.Volwerk et al.



@tusenfem, would you like to fill Indagator in on the details? We've already covered this ground I think. Is this correct tusenfem?

is what correct? my paper? definitely!
__________________
20 minutes into the future
This message is bra-bra-brought to you by z-z-z-zik zak
And-And-And I'm going to be back with you - on Network 23 after these real-real-real-really exciting messages

(Max Headroom)
follow me on twitter: @tusenfem, or follow Rosetta Plasma Consortium: @Rosetta_RPC
tusenfem is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 17th June 2018, 01:24 AM   #2760
Indagator
Student
 
Join Date: May 2018
Posts: 33
Sol88!

More misdirection? How typical! How dishonest! How pathetic! What are you afraid of? Is your electric comet a joke? Is it not worth discussing? I came here to discuss the physical mechanisms and behaviour of your electric comet!

Now, why are you citing a mainstream article that discusses magnetic structures in the tail of a weakly outgassing comet? Everyone that matters, knows that this mainstream article does NOT support, or provide evidence for your electric comet model! Are you confused? Does your comet model now involve the sublimation of volatile ices via insolation as the object follows a Keplerian orbit around a main sequence star? Are you admitting that the electric comet is a failure and you now wish to embrace mainstream models?

If true, then it is a glorious day! Sol88 is renouncing the electric comet by citing and discussing a mainstream paper, which is based on mainstream physics and mainstream knowledge accumulated over decades!

Or are you running away? Evidence indicates you are running away! Why have you stopped answering Jean Tate's probing questions? Perhaps you have no answers, because the electric comet is physically impossible! Why will you not answer the 20 simple "Yes/No" questions I asked you in my first post? Perhaps you have no answers, because, again, there is no electric comet!

But let's get back on track, shall we?

Sol88! This ISF thread is about you and YOUR model! It is not about mainstream comets! Get with the program! Prove to me the electric comet is worthy of my scientific consideration! Prove to all of us that the electric comet is worthy of scientific investigation!

Remember, It's your model! Either it exists or it does not! As you cannot produce a working model that shows how eccentricity is involved in charging and discharging a celestial object, we can state as fact, that there is no electric comet!

Prove me wrong! Present a mathematical model that shows which celestial objects will become electric comets and how they operate at all points in their particular orbits! Should be simple if the electric comet is not an extraordinary failure!

FACT: I admire and respect tusenfem's work! However the paper you've cited has absolutely nothing to do with how eccentricity controls your charging and discharging mechanism! If it does, your mathematical proofs will be ... mind bending, to say the least! However, I suspect there will be nothing of value forthcoming in that regard!

FACT: Scientists love solving problems! Do you wish to be seen as a scientist? Or a lowly priest? I think we all know the answer to that, but I would love for you to prove me wrong!

FACT: It's your model! You fix it! Or state with all honesty and humility that you cannot build a working mathematical model that describes the physical behaviour of an electric comet.

FACT: Without a working mathematical model, the electric comet is DEAD!

As an aside, your "big green grin" emoticon makes your comment look like a childish joke! Was that your intent? Are most of your comments on ISF just childish jokes? You seem to use an inordinate number of emoticons in your posts. Is it fair to say that you, yourself, see your electric comet as nothing more than a childish joke? If you want people to see your "religion" as genuine science, then perhaps you need to take our discussions here seriously!

Sol88! My plan is to kill the electric comet! Your plan should be to prove its worthy of scientific study! Let's dance! Or you can continue to run and hide and misdirect! Your thread! Your choice! I'm not going away!

Last edited by Indagator; 17th June 2018 at 01:32 AM.
Indagator is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Closed Thread

International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » Science, Mathematics, Medicine, and Technology

Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 11:21 AM.
Powered by vBulletin. Copyright ©2000 - 2018, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

This forum began as part of the James Randi Education Foundation (JREF). However, the forum now exists as
an independent entity with no affiliation with or endorsement by the JREF, including the section in reference to "JREF" topics.

Disclaimer: Messages posted in the Forum are solely the opinion of their authors.