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 4th January 2019, 04:29 AM   #2121
Porpoise of Life
Illuminator
 
Porpoise of Life's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2014
Posts: 4,950
Originally Posted by Sol88 View Post
No numbers needed, old mate.
The battle cry of physics cranks everywhere
Porpoise of Life 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 4th January 2019, 04:37 AM   #2122
Sol88
Philosopher
 
Sol88's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 5,162
Quote:
No, it is not. It is a misleading question, because it gives the impression that it will support EC.
What? That electric fields support the sublimation model instead?

Yeah, whatever!

But what it does do is reinforce the fact that
Quote:
In summary, the simplistic model of dust production resulting from gas drag overcoming gravity is no longer tenable.

Which is why I started this thread 10 years ago.


But, hey mainstream scientists are coming round, even if armchair crusaders don’t.
__________________
“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 4th January 2019, 04:39 AM   #2123
Sol88
Philosopher
 
Sol88's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 5,162
Originally Posted by Lukraak_Sisser View Post
I have no idea. How DO you measure something that at the same time has the power to create a cometary tail yet no impact on any of our spacecraft and eludes the finest sensors humanity has put into orbit ever?

I'd love to see the theory that explains how the EC electricity can be so specific that it can only be detected by those that believe in it.
But as others have mentioned, you seem unable to provide any actual coherent theory, let alone an actual prediction.

Lets not forget all predictions from the original EU theory with regards to comets have failed.
So I too ask you, can you provide your actual theory, mathematical model explaining results, predictions and improvements on current theory?
It’s a rock discharging in the solar electric field.
__________________
“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 4th January 2019, 04:46 AM   #2124
jonesdave116
Illuminator
 
jonesdave116's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Posts: 4,104
Quote:
It’s a rock discharging in the solar electric field.
No rock, no discharges. 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 4th January 2019, 04:48 AM   #2125
jonesdave116
Illuminator
 
jonesdave116's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Posts: 4,104
Originally Posted by Sol88 View Post
What? That electric fields support the sublimation model instead?

Yeah, whatever!

But what it does do is reinforce the fact that


Which is why I started this thread 10 years ago.


But, hey mainstream scientists are coming round, even if armchair crusaders don’t.
Complete nonsense. The largest fields will be at asteroids, and low activity comets. What is happening there? You are just making crap up. Your model failed. Totally. Get over it.
__________________
“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 4th January 2019, 04:50 AM   #2126
jonesdave116
Illuminator
 
jonesdave116's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Posts: 4,104
Quote:
Which is why I started this thread 10 years ago.


But, hey mainstream scientists are coming round, even if armchair crusaders don’t.
No they aren't. None of them support the idiotic EC woo.
__________________
“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 4th January 2019, 04:56 AM   #2127
jonesdave116
Illuminator
 
jonesdave116's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Posts: 4,104
Quote:
Same as it’s always been, comets are mostly rock discharging in the solar plasma.
Which is plainly wrong, and debunked 100%. So 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 4th January 2019, 05:00 AM   #2128
Sol88
Philosopher
 
Sol88's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 5,162
Originally Posted by jonesdave116 View Post
Which is plainly wrong, and debunked 100%. So it fails.

Where are all the extra electrons attached to the dust coming from, jonesdave116?
__________________
“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 4th January 2019, 05:00 AM   #2129
jonesdave116
Illuminator
 
jonesdave116's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Posts: 4,104
Originally Posted by Sol88 View Post
True, it’s just our understanding of comets being mostly ice is evolving toward mostly rock.






So, yeah, whatever jonesdave116.

You can hang the shovel up at any stage.
No rock, and the rest is a strawman to hide your failure. It has been proposed for a long time that dust dominates the mass, as I have shown you with links to papers. So quit the lying. Your failed model requires solid rock and no ice. Thousands of tonnes of ice were excavated at Tempel 1, and left a crater far too large to have been made in rock. Therefore your model 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 4th January 2019, 05:01 AM   #2130
jonesdave116
Illuminator
 
jonesdave116's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Posts: 4,104
Originally Posted by Sol88 View Post
Where are all the extra electrons attached to the dust coming from, jonesdave116?
What are you on about? The ambipolar field is of the wrong sign for your idiotic proposal. You fail. Again.
__________________
“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 4th January 2019, 05:02 AM   #2131
Sol88
Philosopher
 
Sol88's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 5,162
Originally Posted by jonesdave116 View Post
Complete nonsense. The largest fields will be at asteroids, and low activity comets. What is happening there? You are just making crap up. Your model failed. Totally. Get over it.
Quote:
The relationship of the uppermost (optically visible) surface to icy material just below the surface and the means of releasing the dust component remains a subject of speculation.
You state it as fact, jonesdave116.

Sublimation,

Simpleton science at its very best.
__________________
“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 4th January 2019, 05:03 AM   #2132
Sol88
Philosopher
 
Sol88's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 5,162
Originally Posted by jonesdave116 View Post
What are you on about? The ambipolar field is of the wrong sign for your idiotic proposal. You fail. Again.
It’s filimentry, dear Watson.

Oh, and unlike the totally untenable sublimation model. The electric field can reverse.

Hard to see sublimation doing any of that.

Does not stop you believing in it though, does it now jd116?
__________________
“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; 4th January 2019 at 05:05 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 4th January 2019, 05:04 AM   #2133
jonesdave116
Illuminator
 
jonesdave116's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Posts: 4,104
Originally Posted by Sol88 View Post
It’s filimentry, dear Watson.
And of the wrong sign. Can't you read?
__________________
“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 4th January 2019, 05:05 AM   #2134
jonesdave116
Illuminator
 
jonesdave116's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Posts: 4,104
Originally Posted by Sol88 View Post
You state it as fact, jonesdave116.

Sublimation,

Simpleton science at its very best.
It is a fact. As seen. And your mechanism fails, otherwise it would be occuring at asteroids. It isn't. Failure.
__________________
“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 4th January 2019, 05:06 AM   #2135
Sol88
Philosopher
 
Sol88's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 5,162
Originally Posted by jonesdave116 View Post
What are you on about? The ambipolar field is of the wrong sign for your idiotic proposal. You fail. Again.
So that’s a yes?

You are starting to believe in a non negligible ambipolar electric field at comet 67P?
__________________
“No rock. Any charge separation is limited. The electric field is pointing in the wrong direction. Currents are doing nothing.” Jonesdave116.

“The 'electric comet' is physically IMPOSSIBLE to model using mainstream science! PERIOD! True story! End of story!” Indagator
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 4th January 2019, 05:07 AM   #2136
Sol88
Philosopher
 
Sol88's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 5,162
Originally Posted by jonesdave116 View Post
It is a fact. As seen. And your mechanism fails, otherwise it would be occuring at asteroids. It isn't. Failure.



You funny.
__________________
“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 4th January 2019, 05:09 AM   #2137
jonesdave116
Illuminator
 
jonesdave116's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Posts: 4,104
Originally Posted by Sol88 View Post
So that’s a yes?

You are starting to believe in a non negligible ambipolar electric field at comet 67P?
I have already answered that question. And it is irrelevant because your woo has failed, and an ambipolar field will do nothing to save it. Asteroids, yes? Lack of a field at Halley, yes? Field is the wrong sign, yes? Field isn't reaching the nucleus, yes? Failure.
__________________
“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 4th January 2019, 05:10 AM   #2138
jonesdave116
Illuminator
 
jonesdave116's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Posts: 4,104
Originally Posted by Sol88 View Post


You funny.
No, I'm stating facts, and you fail to deal with them, proving that you have no answers. You failed.
__________________
“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 4th January 2019, 05:15 AM   #2139
Sol88
Philosopher
 
Sol88's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 5,162
Originally Posted by jonesdave116 View Post
No, I'm stating facts, and you fail to deal with them, proving that you have no answers. You failed.
Quote:
How did the processes of dust ejection from the nucleus, which remain highly speculative, alter the particles?
Fact or speculation, jd116?
__________________
“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 4th January 2019, 05:17 AM   #2140
jonesdave116
Illuminator
 
jonesdave116's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Posts: 4,104
Originally Posted by Sol88 View Post
Fact or speculation, jd116?
Fact. And you have none. Where is the ice excavated at Tempel 1 coming from? It falsifies your model. How about dealing with it?
__________________
“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 4th January 2019, 05:26 AM   #2141
Sol88
Philosopher
 
Sol88's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 5,162
Originally Posted by jonesdave116 View Post
Fact. And you have none. Where is the ice excavated at Tempel 1 coming from? It falsifies your model. How about dealing with it?

Seems some real scientists are.

Not armchair crusaders.
__________________
“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 4th January 2019, 05:32 AM   #2142
jonesdave116
Illuminator
 
jonesdave116's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Posts: 4,104
Originally Posted by Sol88 View Post
Seems some real scientists are.

Not armchair crusaders.
No they are not. Link to this work that shows that there wasn't any ice excavated at Tempel 1, or you are just talking BS, as usual.
__________________
“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 4th January 2019, 06:17 AM   #2143
steenkh
Philosopher
 
steenkh's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Denmark
Posts: 5,744
Originally Posted by Sol88 View Post
But you did read Comet Dust?

Quote:
In summary, the simplistic model of dust production resulting from gas drag overcoming gravity is no longer tenable. However, the dominant mechanism is still unclear.


Regardless if you say or not ambipolar electric fields are causing the jets on comets.
Now you are doing it again. Yes, the dominant mechanism is still unclear, but that does not support EC at all! You do not have a theory that becomes valid by default if other theories fail.

This is the main problem with your posts here: as long as you have no numbers, you do not have a valid theory. You could have a good idea, if it was not for the fact that the only numbers that can be calculated actually show that the idea is not good at all.
__________________
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 4th January 2019, 06:24 AM   #2144
steenkh
Philosopher
 
steenkh's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Denmark
Posts: 5,744
Originally Posted by Sol88 View Post
What? That electric fields support the sublimation model instead?
You should know better by now. It is not a question of either/or. Electric fields can exist, and be too weak to invalidate one theory, and at the same time too weak to support another theory. In other words, the existence of electric fields may well be irrelevant.
__________________
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 4th January 2019, 06:25 AM   #2145
jonesdave116
Illuminator
 
jonesdave116's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Posts: 4,104
Quote:
Regardless if you say or not ambipolar electric fields are causing the jets on comets.
So why are there no jets at asteroids? Why is no ambipolar field seen at Halley, which was considerably more active than 67P?
__________________
“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 4th January 2019, 06:26 AM   #2146
JeanTate
Illuminator
 
Join Date: Nov 2014
Posts: 3,321
Originally Posted by Sol88 View Post
No , I(and Thornhill’s model) has not deviated from the basic premise that comets are ROCK discharging in the solar plasma.

<snip>
Originally Posted by Sol88 View Post
It’s a rock discharging in the solar electric field.
So, which is it, Sol88? "solar plasma" or "solar electric field"?

And what, exactly, do you mean by "discharging"?
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 4th January 2019, 08:38 AM   #2147
Sol88
Philosopher
 
Sol88's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 5,162
Originally Posted by JeanTate View Post
So, which is it, Sol88? "solar plasma" or "solar electric field"?

And what, exactly, do you mean by "discharging"?

There both the same.

As SAFIRE. Has found out.

__________________
“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 4th January 2019, 08:48 AM   #2148
jonesdave116
Illuminator
 
jonesdave116's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Posts: 4,104
Originally Posted by Sol88 View Post
There both the same.

As SAFIRE. Has found out.

Which is a non-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 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 4th January 2019, 10:07 AM   #2149
JeanTate
Illuminator
 
Join Date: Nov 2014
Posts: 3,321
Originally Posted by Sol88 View Post
There both the same.
Thanks.

So your EC is DOA?

As no comets have been found inside the Sun (though you may know of some), and as “solar plasma” and “solar electric field” clearly refer to what’s within the Sun.

Quote:
As SAFIRE. Has found out.


Please explain.
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 4th January 2019, 10:31 AM   #2150
jonesdave116
Illuminator
 
jonesdave116's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Posts: 4,104
Originally Posted by JeanTate View Post
Thanks.

So your EC is DOA?

As no comets have been found inside the Sun (though you may know of some), and as “solar plasma” and “solar electric field” clearly refer to what’s within the Sun.


Please explain.
I'll take a risk and assume the Sol is talking about the solar wind convective electric field, and the solar wind plasma. The ambipolar field suggested by Vigren & Eriksson is assumed to have a potential of 0.03 mV/ m. It is hard to find figures for the convective field, but I did find this paper;

Solar wind dynamic pressure and electric field as the main factors controlling Saturn’s aurorae
Crary, F. J. et al.
http://www.igpp.ucla.edu/public/mkiv...ature03333.pdf

Figure 3 in that paper shows solar wind electric field measurements of a similar magnitude. So, there are some figures we can use. If we had a model in which to use them!
__________________
“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 4th January 2019, 10:49 AM   #2151
jonesdave116
Illuminator
 
jonesdave116's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Posts: 4,104
Following on from above, we can also consider the simulations in this paper;

Grid-free 2D plasma simulations of the complex interaction between the solar wind and small, near-Earth asteroids
Zimmerman, M. I. et al.
https://ntrs.nasa.gov/archive/nasa/c...0150011018.pdf

Figure 2 from that paper gives the field strength for a small, near-Earth asteroid. At least a couple of oom higher than the solar wind and ambipolar fields. This type of field can only form at a comet when it is at its least active. It will regularly form around asteroids, given they have no protection from the solar wind.
__________________
“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 4th January 2019, 10:50 AM   #2152
JeanTate
Illuminator
 
Join Date: Nov 2014
Posts: 3,321
Originally Posted by jonesdave116 View Post
I'll take a risk and assume the Sol is talking about the solar wind convective electric field, and the solar wind plasma. The ambipolar field suggested by Vigren & Eriksson is assumed to have a potential of 0.03 mV/ m. It is hard to find figures for the convective field, but I did find this paper;

Solar wind dynamic pressure and electric field as the main factors controlling Saturn’s aurorae
Crary, F. J. et al.
http://www.igpp.ucla.edu/public/mkiv...ature03333.pdf

Figure 3 in that paper shows solar wind electric field measurements of a similar magnitude. So, there are some figures we can use. If we had a model in which to use them!
I think you give Sol88 too much credit.

My own take on his long history of posts here is that he has only a very tenuous understanding of anything electric. One reason why I think this can be found in the posts of his I quoted, and his response ... though I admit that one could also explain this as 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 4th January 2019, 11:42 AM   #2153
jonesdave116
Illuminator
 
jonesdave116's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Posts: 4,104
Originally Posted by JeanTate View Post
I think you give Sol88 too much credit.

My own take on his long history of posts here is that he has only a very tenuous understanding of anything electric. One reason why I think this can be found in the posts of his I quoted, and his response ... though I admit that one could also explain this as trolling.
You are most likely correct. However, just for completeness, I want to compare the ambipolar field at a comet to what we can expect for an asteroid. Which don't have clouds of dust around them!
So, from Fig. 6 of the Zimmerman paper I linked above, we see the potential created in his simulation. Figures as high as -80 V are seen.
And in one of Sol's favourite papers, Nordheim models comet 67P at 3.5 AU, when the solar wind has access to the nucleus, and finds strong localised fields of surface potential of hundreds of V.
Perhaps Sol now understands why his questions about a piffling ambipolar field are irrelevant.
__________________
“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; 4th January 2019 at 11:45 AM.
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 4th January 2019, 07:45 PM   #2154
Sol88
Philosopher
 
Sol88's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 5,162
Originally Posted by steenkh View Post
You should know better by now. It is not a question of either/or. Electric fields can exist, and be too weak to invalidate one theory, and at the same time too weak to support another theory. In other words, the existence of electric fields may well be irrelevant.
But they are not irrelevant and jd116 is kicking up a stink on no viable mechanism.

Electric fields should not even exist in space plasmas, according to some.

Because they do, it’s a game changer.

Now, models will have take into account plasma circuits, charge seperation, electric fields... you know garden variety plasma physics and electrical engineering.

Welcome to the Electric Comet and asteroids and moons and planets and stars and galaxies.

We are all connected via the electric force
__________________
“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 4th January 2019, 09:50 PM   #2155
Lukraak_Sisser
Illuminator
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Posts: 3,560
Originally Posted by Sol88 View Post
It’s a rock discharging in the solar electric field.
Theory is a VERY loose description of this. Unsupported assertion would be closer.

But lets work with it.

Three simple questions for your theory to answer.

1: What does it discharge TO? After all, that is how electricity works.

2: Why do we not see an equal and opposite tail of the other charge?

3: Since there is a claimed solar electric field, why does the solar wind contain both positive and negative ions, both moving outward at equal speeds? By your theory that would be impossible.
Lukraak_Sisser 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 5th January 2019, 01:15 AM   #2156
steenkh
Philosopher
 
steenkh's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Denmark
Posts: 5,744
Originally Posted by Sol88 View Post
But they are not irrelevant and jd116 is kicking up a stink on no viable mechanism.
My point was that you need to show that the field strengths are sufficient to to support your EC. Just claiming that they are relevant is not enough. After all, nobody doubts that electric fields do not exist, or that electric fields are not important. If they are too weak - as measured - they are irrelevant for comets.



Quote:
We are all connected via the electric force
Yes, of course, but that is another irrelevant statement.
__________________
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 5th January 2019, 02:23 AM   #2157
Sol88
Philosopher
 
Sol88's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 5,162
Originally Posted by Lukraak_Sisser View Post
Theory is a VERY loose description of this. Unsupported assertion would be closer.

But lets work with it.

Three simple questions for your theory to answer.

1: What does it discharge TO? After all, that is how electricity works.

2: Why do we not see an equal and opposite tail of the other charge?

3: Since there is a claimed solar electric field, why does the solar wind contain both positive and negative ions, both moving outward at equal speeds? By your theory that would be impossible.
Let’s!

What level of plasma understanding are you?

Complete novice?

Fairly competent?

Advanced understanding?

Just so I know how proceed!
__________________
“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 5th January 2019, 03:13 AM   #2158
Lukraak_Sisser
Illuminator
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Posts: 3,560
Originally Posted by Sol88 View Post
Let’s!

What level of plasma understanding are you?

Complete novice?

Fairly competent?

Advanced understanding?

Just so I know how proceed!
That doesn't actually answer any of my questions. Let us assume I can understand anything you posit and work from there.

So, how does the EC electric field allow both positive and negative charges to run in the same direction as we observe in the solar wind?
Lukraak_Sisser 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 5th January 2019, 03:18 AM   #2159
jonesdave116
Illuminator
 
jonesdave116's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Posts: 4,104
Quote:
But they are not irrelevant and jd116 is kicking up a stink on no viable mechanism.

Electric fields should not even exist in space plasmas, according to some.

Because they do, it’s a game changer.
They are irrelevant to your failed model. And the solar wind HAS to carry an electric field. It is inevitable. And every time something happens that causes quasi-neutrality to be violated, then an electric field MUST form. You simply don't know what you are talking about.
__________________
“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 5th January 2019, 03:29 AM   #2160
jonesdave116
Illuminator
 
jonesdave116's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Posts: 4,104
Quote:
Now, models will have take into account plasma circuits, charge seperation, electric fields... you know garden variety plasma physics and electrical engineering.

Welcome to the Electric Comet and asteroids and moons and planets and stars and galaxies.

We are all connected via the electric force
Total rubbish, and nothing to do with the failure of your woo. You need rock and discharges. You have neither. Among many other failures.
__________________
“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
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 10:44 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.