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 7th January 2019, 04:43 AM   #2241
jonesdave116
Illuminator
 
jonesdave116's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Posts: 4,880
Originally Posted by Sol88 View Post
Really? Any papers to back up your claims? Other piffling trolling, again.
You are the one that is trolling. If you weren't, we would have a model to assess. What we do have (T & T's poster) is shown to fail.
And papers to back up what claims? This is supposed to be about the non-existent electric comet. And there are plenty of papers to show that it fails.
__________________
“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 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 7th January 2019, 08:53 AM   #2242
JeanTate
Illuminator
 
Join Date: Nov 2014
Posts: 3,852
RC, jd, it's over.

Sol88 has freely, and openly, admitted that he has no EC.

Or rather, his EC is so vague, so empty that there's no point discussing it.

Here's what he's said about his EC:

Originally Posted by Sol88 View Post
Not sure but we are seeing at 67P as well.

Ions and electrons (negatively charged dust).

Let’s find out, ay?

Plasma, funky stuff
Originally Posted by Sol88 View Post
A comet is a rock discharging in the solar plasma. Funny enough.

<snip>
Originally Posted by Sol88 View Post
Plasma, baby.


Funky stuff.
Originally Posted by Sol88 View Post
It’s a rock discharging in the solar electric field.
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 7th January 2019, 12:35 PM   #2243
Sol88
Philosopher
 
Sol88's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 5,935
Let’s contrast the above highlighted Electric Comet model....


Let’s see what the standard mainstream model of comets is, shall we?

Quote:
A comet is an icy, small Solar System body that, when passing close to the Sun, warms and begins to release gases, a process called outgassing. This produces a visible atmosphere or coma, and sometimes also a tail. These phenomena are due to the effects of solar radiation and the solar wind acting upon the nucleus of the comet.
wiki

How’s that any different than,

A comet is a rock seeking electrical equilibrium with its plasma environment?

Seems bit like a double standard to me.

I know there will be howls of that’s an old outdated model no longer used by the mainstream but that’s your model and is still used, such as the first random paper in my collection corroborates

Quote:
Introduction Comets formed beyond the H2O frost line, where ices can condense [e.g., A’Hearn et al., 2012]. A variety of processes have affected comets during their long storage in the Oort cloud and scattered disk (e.g., irradiation by energetic particles, heating by passing stars, collisions). Similarly, repeated solar heating leads to evolution of short period comets during their many passages close to the Sun. However, because most of these processes affect only the outer layer of comets, the pristine nature of the bulk of the nucleus is preserved [Bockel´ee-Morvan et al., 2004; Mumma et al., 1993; Stern, 2003; Weissman and Stern, 1997].
Water Ice and Dust in the Innermost Coma of Comet 103P/Hartley 2 Silvia Protopapaa, Jessica M. Sunshinea, Lori M. Feagaa, Michael S. P. Kelleya, Michael F. A’ Hearn, Tony L. Farnhama, Olivier Groussinb, Sebastien Bessea,c, Fr´ed´eric Merlind, Jian-Yang Li

Though it has been evolving from mostly ice to mostly rock now anywho.

Quote:
(c) What are comets mad 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.
Comer looking ahead Michael F. A’Hearn



So get of your high horse jt.
__________________
“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

Last edited by Sol88; 7th January 2019 at 12:38 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 7th January 2019, 12:37 PM   #2244
Reality Check
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: New Zealand
Posts: 27,129
Thumbs down Idiocy of mentioning the icy receding cliffs that do not exist in his electric comet

Originally Posted by Sol88 View Post
Dude I’ve got icy receding cliffs, great big ones! surely that beats a bit of fluffy snow here and there.
More from Sol88's insane electric comet playbook.

Idiocy of mentioning the icy receding cliffs that do not exist in his electric comet insanity!

Stupidity of expecting astronomers to be excited over basic physics that has been known for over a century. A cliff of sublimating ices will erode at its edge and recede. That is high school science level science, e.g. look at how a slab of CO2 ice sublimates.
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 7th January 2019, 12:39 PM   #2245
Reality Check
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: New Zealand
Posts: 27,129
Thumbs down Repeats a lie about his electric comet insanity which has no ambipolar electric field

Originally Posted by Sol88 View Post
On the other hand electric fields are required for an ELECTRIC COMET, just like the one you refuse to acknowledge in operation at comet67P.
More from Sol88's insane electric comet playbook.

Repeats a lie about his electric comet insanity which has no ambipolar electric fields.
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 7th January 2019, 12:44 PM   #2246
Reality Check
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: New Zealand
Posts: 27,129
Thumbs down His "idiotic, lying question" play - the icy cliffs receded

Originally Posted by Sol88 View Post
Thought icy cliffs sublimated, now it’s backwasting?
More from Sol88's insane electric comet playbook.

His "idiotic, lying question" play - the icy cliffs receded and this paper calls that backwasting and "scarp retreat".
The nucleus of Comet 9P/Tempel 1: Shape and geology from two flybys Thomas, P. et al. (incl. A'Hearn, M. & Sunshine, J.)
Quote:

The nucleus of comet Tempel 1 has been investigated at close range during two spacecraft missions separated by one comet orbit of the Sun, 5½ years. The combined imaging covers ∼70% of the surface of this object which has a mean radius of 2.83 ± 0.1 km. The surface can be divided into two terrain types: rough, pitted terrain and smoother regions of varying local topography. The rough surface has round depressions from resolution limits (∼10 m/pixel) up to ∼1 km across, spanning forms from crisp steep-walled pits, to subtle albedo rings, to topographic rings, with all ranges of morphologic gradation. Three gravitationally low regions of the comet have smoother terrain, parts of which appear to be deposits from minimally modified flows, with other parts likely to be heavily eroded portions of multiple layer piles. Changes observed between the two missions are primarily due to backwasting of scarps bounding one of these probable flow deposits. This style of erosion is also suggested by remnant mesa forms in other areas of smoother terrain. The two distinct terrains suggest either an evolutionary change in processes, topographically-controlled processes, or a continuing interaction of erosion and deposition.

Highlights

► Tempel 1 has two types of terrain, rough pitted and smoother, flow-like materials. ► The smooth materials are collected in low regions. ► Changes observed between the Deep Impact and Stardust-NExT encounters involve scarp retreat. ► Timescales for formation of the surface’s topography appear to be tens to perhaps hundreds of orbits.
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 7th January 2019, 12:46 PM   #2247
Reality Check
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: New Zealand
Posts: 27,129
Thumbs down Repeats his delusion about the ambipolar electric field inside the coma

Originally Posted by Sol88 View Post
Not needed when it has an ambipolar electric field.
More from Sol88's insane electric comet playbook.

Repeats his delusion about the ambipolar electric field inside the coma doing whatever he fantasies.
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 7th January 2019, 12:48 PM   #2248
Reality Check
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: New Zealand
Posts: 27,129
Thumbs down An insane "Do ices on comets sublimate" question

Originally Posted by Sol88 View Post
Do ices on comets sublimate, jd116?
More from Sol88's insane electric comet playbook.

An insane "Do ices on comets sublimate" question when that is the mainstream model that Sol88 should have known about for at least 12 years and has been pointed out here many times over the last 9 years.
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 7th January 2019, 12:52 PM   #2249
Sol88
Philosopher
 
Sol88's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 5,935
Originally Posted by Reality Check View Post
More from Sol88's insane electric comet playbook.

An insane "Do ices on comets sublimate" question when that is the mainstream model that Sol88 should have known about for at least 12 years and has been pointed out here many times over the last 9 years.



Quote:
In summary, the simplistic model of dust production resulting from gas drag overcoming gravity is no longer tenable.
Cometary Dust
__________________
“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
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 7th January 2019, 12:56 PM   #2250
jonesdave116
Illuminator
 
jonesdave116's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Posts: 4,880
Originally Posted by Sol88 View Post
Let’s contrast the above highlighted Electric Comet model....


Let’s see what the standard mainstream model of comets is, shall we?

wiki

How’s that any different than,

A comet is a rock seeking electrical equilibrium with its plasma environment?

Seems bit like a double standard to me.

I know there will be howls of that’s an old outdated model no longer used by the mainstream but that’s your model and is still used, such as the first random paper in my collection corroborates

Water Ice and Dust in the Innermost Coma of Comet 103P/Hartley 2 Silvia Protopapaa, Jessica M. Sunshinea, Lori M. Feagaa, Michael S. P. Kelleya, Michael F. A’ Hearn, Tony L. Farnhama, Olivier Groussinb, Sebastien Bessea,c, Fr´ed´eric Merlind, Jian-Yang Li

Though it has been evolving from mostly ice to mostly rock now anywho.

Comer looking ahead Michael F. A’Hearn



So get of your high horse jt.
You haven't got a model. The observations at Tempel 1 and Hartley 2 killed it. Not to mention those at Halley over 30 years ago, and the other comet missions, including to 67P. You have absolutely nothing. No rock, no discharges, no way of explaining the gases in the coma, no way of explaining the ice seen at comets.
tl;dr? You don't have a model.
__________________
“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 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 7th January 2019, 12:58 PM   #2251
jonesdave116
Illuminator
 
jonesdave116's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Posts: 4,880
Quote:
In summary, the simplistic model of dust production resulting from gas drag overcoming gravity is no longer tenable.
And in Thornhill's model there is no dust on the surface! Fail.
__________________
“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 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 7th January 2019, 12:58 PM   #2252
JeanTate
Illuminator
 
Join Date: Nov 2014
Posts: 3,852
Originally Posted by Sol88 View Post
Let’s contrast the above highlighted Electric Comet model....
Let's not.

This thread is about "The Electric Comet Theory".

Quote:
<snip>

A comet is a rock seeking electrical equilibrium with its plasma environment?

Seems bit like a double standard to me.

<snip>
The "double standard" is entirely yours, Sol88.

You've changed what you mean by your EC, many, many times. Unless and until you can present a coherent, consistent, quantitative model, there's nothing to discuss.

Period.

Quote:
So get of your high horse jt.
Ah the old "mainstream MUST BE WRONG! so my EC MUST BE RITE!!!"

Sorry, not interested in that sort of trolling.
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 7th January 2019, 01:03 PM   #2253
Reality Check
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: New Zealand
Posts: 27,129
Thumbs down Lies about jonesdave116 post on Whipple’s original model from the 1950's

Originally Posted by Sol88 View Post
You said Whipple’s model dead and buried.
More from Sol88's insane electric comet playbook.

Lies about jonesdave116 post on Whipple’s original model from the 1950's.
Quote:
Another strawman. I keep telling you, nobody is still following the 1950's model. You are arguing with your own strawman, nobody else. Pointless. Stop listening to the idiot Thornhill, and get a mind of your own.
jonesdave116 stated the obvious fact that science progresses and so models change. A 70 year old model has been updated to include new evidence ands so is not the original model. Sol88 being unable to understand this real world fact is not a surprise because he has fallen for the unchanging, deleted Thunderbolts cult dogma abut the universe (not only his electric comet insanity).

The modern mainstream model is not Whipple’s original model from the 1950's because of all of the Rosetta mission papers that Sol88 has cited ! Plus the thousands of other cometary paper published since the 1950's.

The modern mainstream model shares features with Whipple’s original model where the evidence for those features has become stronger, e.g. comets are made of ices and non-terrestrial dust because we have samples of the dust (Stardust mission) and saw ices and dust being blown off Tempel 1 (Deep Impact mission).
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 7th January 2019, 01:04 PM   #2254
jonesdave116
Illuminator
 
jonesdave116's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Posts: 4,880
Quote:
A comet is a rock seeking electrical equilibrium with its plasma environment?
Idiotic statement. Asteroids are more charged up than comets. What are they doing? Ridiculous, unscientific nonsense.
__________________
“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 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 7th January 2019, 01:21 PM   #2255
Reality Check
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: New Zealand
Posts: 27,129
Thumbs down Back to his delusions about the ambipolar electric field, charged dust and lies

Originally Posted by Sol88 View Post
Which brings us back to the ambipolar electric field and the fact the dust is charged.
More from Sol88's insane electric comet playbook.

Back to his delusions about the ambipolar electric field, charged dust and lies about the comet model.
The ambipolar electric fields are small scale fields inside a comet coma.
Dust being charged has been textbook, mainstream cometary physics for decades.
The Whipple’s model is not "simplistic" or "outdated and superseded". The modern comet model still works with comets made of ices and dust.

A "Sublimation can not remove the size of the dust observed at Rosetta’s orbit" lie.
One paper claimed that small dust particles would not be removed by gas drag and proposed other mechanisms. Rosetta observed dust sizes ranged from "nano-grains " to fluffy aggregates.

A "overestimation of water production (Haser Model)" lie when the rate of gas production from sublimation is an input to the Haser Model as pointed out many times.

Usual stupidity that Michael A'Hearn's (that "principle investigator") opinion that dust dominates in comets support Sol88's electric comet insanity that comets are rock.

Usual insane insult that the deceased Michael A'Hearn thought that comets are actual rock as in Sol88's electric comet insanity. Michael A'Hearn could read and knew the physical evidence that comets are made of ices and dust (density, Deep Impact, dust samples, observed ices,etc.). Michael A'Hearn was not insanely ignorant or deluded enough to believe that comets are actual rock.

Last edited by Reality Check; 7th January 2019 at 01:22 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 7th January 2019, 01:34 PM   #2256
Reality Check
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: New Zealand
Posts: 27,129
Thumbs down Usual lies about irrelevant, mainstream ices and dust comet papers

Originally Posted by Sol88 View Post
POLYOXYMETHYLENE AS PARENT MOLECULE FOR THE FORMALDEHYDE EXTENDED SOURCE IN COMET HALLEY
More from Sol88's insane electric comet playbook.

Usual lies about irrelevant, mainstream ices and dust comet papers.
Polyoxymethylene as Parent Molecule for the Formaldehyde Extended Source in Comet Halley
An unexplained observation before this paper was formaldehyde in comet coma. It was not seen that a comet nucleus contained formaldehyde and thus the observed formaldehyde was not from sublimating formaldehyde. The proposed mechanism even before this paper was degrading of polyoxymethylene in dust particles in the coma. This paper is experimental evidence that supports that mechanism .

Sol88's repeats the idiocy that "Unexpected and significant findings" magically support his electric comet insanity when deluded fantasies cannot explain anything and have no significance.

Unexpected and significant findings in comet 67P/Churyumov–Gerasimenko: an interdisciplinary view is actual science not the deluded dogma of the Thunderbolts cult.

Last edited by Reality Check; 7th January 2019 at 01:35 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 7th January 2019, 01:54 PM   #2257
Reality Check
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: New Zealand
Posts: 27,129
Thumbs down A delusion that actual electrochemistry on comets is not electrochemistry

Originally Posted by Sol88 View Post
There is electrochemical “stuff” going on that has nothing to do with the sublimation of ice/s and everything to do with a voltage potential and the associated electric fields
More from Sol88's insane electric comet playbook.

A delusion that actual electrochemistry on comets is not electrochemistry ! Chemistry of any kind needs compounds to act upon. For comets that means sublimation of ices for H2O and CO2 and to eject dust particles into the coma where electrochemistry can happen.
Polyoxymethylene as Parent Molecule for the Formaldehyde Extended Source in Comet Halley
Quote:
From new experimental data, we are now able to consider multiphase chemistry: POM in the solid state on cometary grains slowly degrades by solar photons and heat and produces H2CO in the gaseous phase. This is a new approach to cometary organic chemistry. We show, by considering simple assumptions about the cometary environment, that the hypothesis of POM on grains leads to a very good agreement with Giotto observations if we assume that the cometary grains are ~7% POM by mass at a temperature of 330 K.

That formaldehyde is something Sol88's electric comet insanity cannot explain.

Usual electric comet insanity that comets are rocks is extended with his another lying "consolidated compact dust" delusion. Sol88 knows that comets have high porosity (up to 70%!) and contain ices. Sol88 has been writing "comets are mostly vacuum" posts for the last few weeks !

Lies about jonesdave116's beliefs. Knowledgeable people such as jonesdave116, myself, other posters here and most educated people in the world (obviously excluding the deluded Thunderbolts cult) believe in current, evidence supported science. The physical evidence is that comets are made of ices and dust (density, Deep Impact, dust samples, observed ices, etc.).
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 7th January 2019, 01:55 PM   #2258
Reality Check
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: New Zealand
Posts: 27,129
Thumbs down Idiocy of asking irrelevant, ignorant, already answered questions yet again

Originally Posted by Sol88 View Post
Do believe there is an ambipolar electric field at comet 67P, jonesdave116?
More from Sol88's insane electric comet playbook.

Idiocy of asking irrelevant, ignorant, already answered questions yet again (ambipolar electric field).

Last edited by Reality Check; 7th January 2019 at 01:56 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 7th January 2019, 01:57 PM   #2259
Reality Check
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: New Zealand
Posts: 27,129
Thumbs down Idiocy of asking irrelevant, ignorant, already answered questions yet again

Originally Posted by Sol88 View Post
Do you believe that there’s an ambipolar electric field at comet 67P?
More from Sol88's insane electric comet playbook.

Idiocy of asking irrelevant, ignorant, already answered questions yet again (ambipolar electric field).
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 7th January 2019, 01:59 PM   #2260
Reality Check
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: New Zealand
Posts: 27,129
Thumbs down Idiocy of asking irrelevant, ignorant, already answered questions yet again

Originally Posted by Sol88 View Post
Unexpected and significant findings in comet 67P/Churyumov–Gerasimenko: an interdisciplinary view



Is near-surface ice the driver of dust activity on 67P/Churyumov-Gerasimenko

Electron and Ion Dynamics of the Solar Wind Interaction with a Weakly Outgassing Comet
More from Sol88's insane electric comet playbook.

Idiocy of citing irrelevant to his electric comet insanity, already discussed mainstream ices and dust papers again and again.

Idiocy of asking irrelevant, ignorant, already answered questions yet again (ambipolar electric field).
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 7th January 2019, 02:00 PM   #2261
Reality Check
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: New Zealand
Posts: 27,129
Thumbs down Idiocy of asking irrelevant, ignorant, already answered questions again and again

Originally Posted by Sol88 View Post
Do you believe there is an ambipolar electric field at comet 67P, jonesdave116?
More from Sol88's insane electric comet playbook.

Idiocy of asking irrelevant, ignorant, already answered questions again and again (ambipolar electric field).
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 7th January 2019, 02:01 PM   #2262
Reality Check
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: New Zealand
Posts: 27,129
Thumbs down Idiocy of asking irrelevant, ignorant, already answered questions again and again

Originally Posted by Sol88 View Post
Is the dust charged?
More from Sol88's insane electric comet playbook.

Idiocy of asking irrelevant, ignorant, already answered questions again and again (the dust is charged which is decades old, textbook astronomy).
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 7th January 2019, 02:02 PM   #2263
Reality Check
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: New Zealand
Posts: 27,129
Thumbs down Idiocy of asking irrelevant, ignorant, already answered questions again and again

Originally Posted by Sol88 View Post
Do you believe there is an ambipolar electric field at comet 67P, jonesdave116?
More from Sol88's insane electric comet playbook.

Idiocy of asking irrelevant, ignorant, already answered questions again and again (ambipolar electric field).
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 7th January 2019, 02:04 PM   #2264
Reality Check
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: New Zealand
Posts: 27,129
Thumbs down Idiocy of asking irrelevant, ignorant, already answered questions again and again

Originally Posted by Sol88 View Post
Is there iris there not an ambipolar electric field at comet 67P, jonesdave116?...
More from Sol88's insane electric comet playbook.

Idiocy of asking irrelevant, ignorant, already answered questions again and again (ambipolar electric field).
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 7th January 2019, 02:07 PM   #2265
Reality Check
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: New Zealand
Posts: 27,129
Thumbs down A lie that an ambipolar electric field is relevant to his electric comet insanity

Originally Posted by Sol88 View Post
It more than relevant and you just can not admit it. ...
More from Sol88's insane electric comet playbook.

A lie that an ambipolar electric field inside a comet coma is relevant to his electric comet insanity which has a solar electric field doing whatever his Thunderbolts cult delusions demand.
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 7th January 2019, 02:13 PM   #2266
Reality Check
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: New Zealand
Posts: 27,129
Thumbs down Idiocy of citing irrelevant mainstream ices and dust comet papers

Originally Posted by Sol88 View Post
More from Sol88's insane electric comet playbook.

Idiocy of citing irrelevant mainstream ices and dust comet papers.

Insanely random highlighting of text in a quote from this paper. The quote is that ion velocities in the diamagnetic cavity support "The presence of a non-negligible ambipolar electric field and limited importance of ion-neutral collisional coupling". That diamagnetic cavity is hundreds of kilometers from the comet nucleus !
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 7th January 2019, 02:16 PM   #2267
Sol88
Philosopher
 
Sol88's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 5,935
Originally Posted by jonesdave116 View Post
Idiotic statement. Asteroids are more charged up than comets. What are they doing? Ridiculous, unscientific nonsense.

Paper?
__________________
“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
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 7th January 2019, 02:19 PM   #2268
jonesdave116
Illuminator
 
jonesdave116's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Posts: 4,880
Just a little reminder for Sol of what his model says;


Quote:
• The observed jets of comets are electric arc discharges to the nucleus, producing “electrical discharge machining” (EDM) of the surface. The excavated material is accelerated into space along the jets’ observed filamentary arcs.
Lol. Nope. They are gas and dust and (sometimes) ice grains, all heading away from the nucleus. No signatures of EDM (lol). No signatures of discharges to the nucleus. Or anywhere else. Fail.

Quote:
• Intermittent and wandering arcs erode the surface and burn it black, leaving the distinctive scarring patterns of electric discharges.
More lols! No wandering arcs seen eroding the surface. The surface is black due to the observed organics. Fail.

Quote:
• The primary distinction between comet and asteroid surfaces is that electrical arcing and “electrostatic cleaning” of the comet nucleus will leave little or no dust or debris on the surface during the active phase, even if a shallow layer of dust may be attracted back to the nucleus electrostatically as the comet becomes dormant in its retreat to more remote regions.
Nope. The comet is producing more dust in the active phase. As would be expected for insolation driven ejection. And the majority of the dust ejected appears to be falling back to the nucleus. So, this supposedly negatively charged dust is being ejected from a supposedly negatively charged comet, and then being attracted back toward the comet? I think not. Fail.


Quote:
• It is the electric force that holds the spherical cometary coma in place as the
comet races around the Sun. The diameter of the visible coma will often reach millions of miles. And the visible coma is surrounded by an even larger and more “improbable” spherical envelope of fluorescing hydrogen visible in ultraviolet light.

Quote:
Lai proposed………..This view might seem to be contraindicated by the fact that roughly matching amounts of oxygen are deduced from observed OH emission. Most workers would take this as a support for the concept of water molecules as the source for both dissociated hydrogen and hydroxyl radicals.”
Asteroid and Comet Exploration
Arrhenius, G., Alfven, H., Fitzgerald, R.
https://ntrs.nasa.gov/archive/nasa/c...9730018994.pdf

So, who do we believe? A couple of scientifically illiterate woo merchants who say that it is improbable? Or this Alfven bloke and his co-authors? Fail.

Quote:
• Comets follow their elongated paths within a weak electrical field centered on the Sun. In approaching the Sun, a charge imbalance develops between the nucleus and the higher voltage and charge density near the Sun. Growing electrical stresses initiate discharges and the formation of a glowing plasma sheath, appearing as the coma and tail.
Whoops! So, why aren't asteroids on elliptical orbits doing this? Why do main belt comets exist, that have low eccentricities? Fail.

Quote:
• Comets are debris produced during violent electrical interactions of planets and moons in an earlier phase of solar system history. Comets are similar to asteroids, and their composition varies. Most comets should be homogeneous—their interiors will have the same composition as their surfaces. They are simply “asteroids on eccentric orbits.”
See the previous re eccentricity. And cometary material is nothing like any planet or moon known to man. Density is wrong. Ice would not survive impossible electrical woo blasting it off a planet.

So, to summarise - a complete and utter failure. Which could have been avoided had the authors bothered to avail themselves of the data from the Halley missions 20 years previous to that pile of fail being written.

http://thunderbolts.info/pdf/ElectricComet.pdf
__________________
“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; 7th January 2019 at 02:42 PM.
jonesdave116 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 7th January 2019, 02:20 PM   #2269
Reality Check
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: New Zealand
Posts: 27,129
Thumbs down A lie that the paper he cited stated that the solar wind reaches the comet nucleus

Originally Posted by Sol88 View Post
Kinda knocks your simplistic “solar wind is getting nowhere near the nucleus” on the the head.
More from Sol88's insane electric comet playbook.

A lie that the paper he cited stated that the solar wind reaches the comet nucleus.
On the ion-neutral coupling in cometary comae oddly enough is abut ion-neutral coupling inside cometary comae !

A "your simplistic" lie. It is textbook and complex astrophysics and physical evidence that shows that comet coma shield the nucleus from the solar wind. As implied in the "low activity" paper Sol88 has cited so many times !

jonesdave116's reply is the science for Rosetta and even some pretty pictures!
Originally Posted by jonesdave116 View Post
Don't do comprehension, do you? It is an observed fact that the solar wind is getting nowhere near the nucleus for about 8 months around perihelion. Tough luck.

The birth and growth of a solar wind cavity around a comet – Rosetta observations
Behar, E. et al.
https://academic.oup.com/mnras/artic...2/S396/4036875
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 7th January 2019, 02:20 PM   #2270
jonesdave116
Illuminator
 
jonesdave116's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Posts: 4,880
Originally Posted by Sol88 View Post
Paper?
I already linked you to it!!!!!! Do a bloody search on 'Zimmerman'.
__________________
“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 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 7th January 2019, 02:31 PM   #2271
Reality Check
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: New Zealand
Posts: 27,129
Thumbs down Irrelevant idiocy about the irrelevant ambipolar electric field

Originally Posted by Sol88 View Post
Does not need to be any near the nucleus me old mate for the ambipolar electric field to be in operation.
More from Sol88's insane electric comet playbook.

Irrelevant idiocy about the irrelevant ambipolar electric field. The ambipolar electric field is due to the different mobility of ions and electrons in plasma. The solar wind and radiation is what makes the neutral particles ejected from the nucleus into a plasma.

Insults and a delusion about the On the ion-neutral coupling in cometary comae paper.
Quote:
These analytical results are in line with previous numerical calculations, adapting similar but not identical field profiles. The presence of a non-negligible ambipolar electric field and limited importance of ion-neutral collisional coupling are further supported by observations in the diamagnetic cavity of comet 67P/Churyumov–Gerasimenko by plasma instruments onboard Rosetta that reveal ion speeds several times higher than the neutral expansion velocity.
This is merely that hundreds of kilometers away from the nucleus of 67 we have evidence of the effects of a non-negligible ambipolar electric field inside the coma.

This is irrelevant to Sol88's electric comet insanity that comets are rocks inside an imaginary strong enough to magical electric discharges, solar electric field.
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 7th January 2019, 02:32 PM   #2272
Reality Check
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: New Zealand
Posts: 27,129
Thumbs down Idiocy of asking irrelevant, ignorant, already answered questions again and again

Originally Posted by Sol88 View Post
Dude you are completely clueless.
More from Sol88's insane electric comet playbook.

Usual insults. Idiocy of asking irrelevant, ignorant, already answered questions again and again (ambipolar electric field).
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 7th January 2019, 02:33 PM   #2273
Reality Check
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: New Zealand
Posts: 27,129
Thumbs down Idiocy of asking irrelevant, ignorant, already answered questions again and again

Originally Posted by Sol88 View Post
Perhaps you can help, do you believe that there is an ambipolar electric field at comet 67P, steenkh?
More from Sol88's insane electric comet playbook.

Idiocy of asking irrelevant, ignorant, already answered questions again and again (ambipolar electric field).
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 7th January 2019, 02:34 PM   #2274
Reality Check
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: New Zealand
Posts: 27,129
Thumbs down Idiocy of asking irrelevant, ignorant, already answered questions again and again

Originally Posted by Sol88 View Post
I care and so should you. Do you believe there’s an ambipolar electric field at comet 67P, jonesdave116?
More from Sol88's insane electric comet playbook.

Idiocy of asking irrelevant, ignorant, already answered questions again and again (ambipolar electric field).
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 7th January 2019, 02:37 PM   #2275
Reality Check
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: New Zealand
Posts: 27,129
Thumbs down Idiocy of asking irrelevant, ignorant, already answered questions again and again

Originally Posted by Sol88 View Post
...Do you believe there is an ambipolar electric field at comet 67, jonesdave116?
More from Sol88's insane electric comet playbook.

Idiocy of asking irrelevant, ignorant, already answered questions again and again (ambipolar electric field).

Some "electric fields all the way down" insanity about a quote from a mainstream ices and dust comet paper.
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 7th January 2019, 02:48 PM   #2276
Reality Check
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: New Zealand
Posts: 27,129
Originally Posted by Sol88 View Post
The bit where you can not comprehend that the mysterious ambipolar electric field is stopping the solar wind. charged particle flow.
More from Sol88's insane electric comet playbook.

A delusion that the basic plasma physics of ambipolar electric fields is mysterious. It is textbook plasma physics read by astronomy students. The link is to lecture notes ! It is simply the different mobility of ions and electrons in plasmas.

A "charged particle flow" lie. The solar wind is called the solar wind .

Hypocrisy that the ambipolar electric field stops the solar wind when Sol88's claim is that the solar wind always reaches the nucleus to do whatever he electric comet insanity demands.

A delusion that the ambipolar electric field stops the solar wind when it is basically the particles of the solar wind being deflected by the particles of the comet.

Usual stupidity about charged dust, etc.

Originally Posted by jonesdave116 View Post
Don't do comprehension, do you? It is an observed fact that the solar wind is getting nowhere near the nucleus for about 8 months around perihelion. Tough luck.

The birth and growth of a solar wind cavity around a comet – Rosetta observations
Behar, E. et al.
https://academic.oup.com/mnras/artic...2/S396/4036875
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 7th January 2019, 02:50 PM   #2277
Reality Check
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: New Zealand
Posts: 27,129
Thumbs down idiocy of asking irrelevant, ignorant, already answered questions again and again

Originally Posted by Sol88 View Post
No 180 dude, you’re shadow boxing with your own strawman.....
More from Sol88's insane electric comet playbook.

Insults, delusions and idiocy of asking irrelevant, ignorant, already answered questions again and again (ambipolar electric field).
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 7th January 2019, 03:01 PM   #2278
Reality Check
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: New Zealand
Posts: 27,129
Thumbs down Repeats an ignorant delusion that ambipolar electric fields do whatever he wants

Originally Posted by Sol88 View Post
We both agree THE SOALR WIND IS NOWHERE NEAR THE NUCLEUS. ...
More from Sol88's insane electric comet playbook.

Repeats an ignorant delusion that ambipolar electric fields do whatever he wants (stops the solar wind).

A LIE (in his upper case) because his lie about the electric comet insanity (which has nothing to do with the solar wind or ambipolar electric fields) is that the solar wind does reach the comet nucleus to do magic.
Sol88 has been citing an electrostatic dust activity during low comet activity paper for months and claiming that this electrostatic dust activity always happens.
Sol88 has been stating for months that the solar wind always reaches the comet nucleus.
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 7th January 2019, 03:13 PM   #2279
Reality Check
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: New Zealand
Posts: 27,129
Thumbs down An insane statement about textbook plasma physics (mass loading).

Originally Posted by Sol88 View Post
Mass loading is a crock.
More from Sol88's insane electric comet playbook.

An insane "crock" statement about textbook plasma physics (mass loading).
Mass loading is textbook plasma physics. Any plasma encountering a massive gas or plasma or even solid body can pick up mass from that gas or body. The solar wind is predominantly electrons and protons. When the solar wind hits a comet coma containing massive molecules (H2O, CO, CO2, etc.), some of those molecules are picked up by the solar wind. This is mass loading.
PHYSICS OF MASS LOADED PLASMAS (PDF)
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 7th January 2019, 03:16 PM   #2280
Reality Check
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: New Zealand
Posts: 27,129
Thumbs down Lies about an irrelevant, mainstream ices and dust paper yet again

Originally Posted by Sol88 View Post
At the surface not some distance from it.
More from Sol88's insane electric comet playbook.

Lies about an irrelevant, mainstream ices and dust paper yet again.
We have never detected the motion of ions in the coma at the surface of any comet . All such detection has been at distances of at least 10s of kilometers from the surface.
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
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 10:00 AM.
Powered by vBulletin. Copyright ©2000 - 2020, 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.