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
 

Notices


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.
Reply
Old Yesterday, 07:06 PM   #2801
Reality Check
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: New Zealand
Posts: 21,773
Thumbs down Usual lying question to detrail from his electric comet delusions

Originally Posted by Sol88 View Post
Do we use MHD equations or Kinetic Plasma equations, reality check?
The subject of this thread is his electric comet so:
20 June 2018: Usual lying question (his electric comet delusions do not use "MHD equations or Kinetic Plasma equations")

Knowledgeable, rational people treat plasma appropriately. MHD when conditions need it. As particles (e.g. a PIC simulation) when conditions need it.
Reality Check 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 Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old Yesterday, 07:08 PM   #2802
Reality Check
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: New Zealand
Posts: 21,773
Thumbs down Cites an ices and dust paper again to detail from his many comet delusions.

Originally Posted by Sol88;12333092[B
20 June 2018: Cites an ices and dust paper again to detail from his many comet delusions.

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.
Reality Check 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 Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old Yesterday, 07:16 PM   #2803
Reality Check
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: New Zealand
Posts: 21,773
Thumbs down Lies about a paper again to derail from his many comet delusions

Originally Posted by Sol88 View Post
Plasma – Surface Interactions with Airless Bodies in Space and the Laboratory J.Deca(PI),X.Wang
20 June 2018: Lies about a paper again to derail from his many comet delusions.

These airless bodies do not include active comets, e.g. 67P during much of the Rosetta mission to it. As soon as a comet develops a coma, the surface is shielded from the solar wind and to some extent from UV radiation.

This is not really a paper - it is a proposal to form a new group to study this field.

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.
Reality Check 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 Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old Yesterday, 07:24 PM   #2804
Reality Check
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: New Zealand
Posts: 21,773
Thumbs down An insane and ignorant insult of J. Agarwal's scientific paper

Originally Posted by Sol88 View Post
Is there a need any more for J. Agarwal's fictitious requirement for some sub surface energy storage? Evidence of sub-surface energy storage in comet 67P from the outburst of 2016 July 03 doi:10.1093/mnras/stx2386
20 June 2018: An insane and ignorant insult of J. Agarwal's scientific paper.
The paper is a scientific explanation using observations of an 67P outburst event.
Evidence of sub-surface energy storage in comet 67P from the outburst of 2016 July 03
Quote:
On 3 July 2016, several instruments on board ESA's Rosetta spacecraft detected signs of an outburst event on comet 67P, at a heliocentric distance of 3.32 AU from the sun, outbound from perihelion. We here report on the inferred properties of the ejected dust and the surface change at the site of the outburst. The activity coincided with the local sunrise and continued over a time interval of 14 - 68 minutes. It left a 10m-sized icy patch on the surface. The ejected material comprised refractory grains of several hundred microns in size, and sub-micron-sized water ice grains. The high dust mass production rate is incompatible with the free sublimation of crystalline water ice under solar illumination as the only acceleration process. Additional energy stored near the surface must have increased the gas density. We suggest a pressurized sub-surface gas reservoir, or the crystallization of amorphous water ice as possible causes.
This is an outburst event, not a jet or a collimated jet !
Reality Check 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 Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old Yesterday, 07:24 PM   #2805
Sol88
Master Poster
 
Sol88's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 2,811
Originally Posted by Reality Check View Post
The subject of this thread is his electric comet so:
20 June 2018: Usual lying question (his electric comet delusions do not use "MHD equations or Kinetic Plasma equations")

Knowledgeable, rational people treat plasma appropriately. MHD when conditions need it. As particles (e.g. a PIC simulation) when conditions need it.
You seem like a knowledgeable and rational sorta bloke, which do we use?

MHD equations that tusenfem was very coy in explaining or kinetic plasma equations that enable kinetic plasma effects that I've been banging on about since the start of the ELECTRIC COMET THREAD!

I also believe we've discussed things like charge separation and Debye length in space plasmas and their relationship at comets before so...

I think you can see were we are heading here!

Patience young padiwan, our little chestnut of comets are homogenous solid rock debate is back on the cards very soon!
__________________
"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 Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old Yesterday, 07:26 PM   #2806
Sol88
Master Poster
 
Sol88's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 2,811
Originally Posted by Reality Check View Post
20 June 2018: An insane and ignorant insult of J. Agarwal's scientific paper.
The paper is a scientific explanation using observations of an 67P outburst event.
Evidence of sub-surface energy storage in comet 67P from the outburst of 2016 July 03


This is an outburst event, not a jet or a collimated jet !
is if you stand far enough back!!

When we zoom in on the nucleus we see NO COLLIMATED jets but when we zoom out...booya!!!

Not a problem for the ELECTRIC COMET but for a melting icydirtball....fatal!
__________________
"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 Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old Yesterday, 07:40 PM   #2807
Reality Check
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: New Zealand
Posts: 21,773
Thumbs down Adds "surface electric fields making dust from rock" to his comets being rock delusio

Originally Posted by Sol88 View Post
Any ambipolar electric fields around 67/P, I wonder?

When those surface electric fields become strong enough to turn rock to dust and accelerate it away in collimated jets, what would we observe?
20 June 2018: Adds "surface electric fields making dust from rock to form collimated jets" to his comets being rock delusion.

He lies about the ambipolar electric fields around 67/P which are not on the surface.

He lies about the proposal which describes an ambipolar electric field measured for the Moon ~43,000 km away from the surface of the Moon.

The lunar surface does not have rock turned to dust or collimated jets even with "strong electric fields" caused by differential charging of the surface by plasma interactions. Comets have their surface shielded from the solar wind by their coma which happens before their jets appear .

Electric fields lifting existing dust does not magically create collimated jets of dust.

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.

Last edited by Reality Check; Yesterday at 07:42 PM.
Reality Check 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 Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old Yesterday, 07:46 PM   #2808
Reality Check
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: New Zealand
Posts: 21,773
Thumbs down A really stupid question to detail from his many comet delusions

Originally Posted by Sol88 View Post
You seem like a knowledgeable and rational sorta bloke, which do we use?
20 June 2018: A really stupid question to detail from his many comet delusions
I stated clearly that it depends.
Reality Check 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 Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old Yesterday, 07:49 PM   #2809
Reality Check
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: New Zealand
Posts: 21,773
Thumbs down A lie that kinematic effects have appear before the last week or so

Originally Posted by Sol88 View Post
...kinetic plasma effects that I've been banging on about since the start of the ELECTRIC COMET THREAD!
20 June 2018: A lie that kinematic effects have appear before the last week or so.
He was ignorant about the treatment of plasma as particles rather then a fluid (MHD) for some time.
Reality Check 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 Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old Yesterday, 07:53 PM   #2810
Sol88
Master Poster
 
Sol88's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 2,811
^^^^

Thought so!

So here, comet tails, we are NOT using MHD.

opens a whole new world champ!
__________________
"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 Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old Yesterday, 07:54 PM   #2811
Reality Check
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: New Zealand
Posts: 21,773
Thumbs down An insane lie that collimated jets are fatal for mainstream comets

Originally Posted by Sol88 View Post
...but for a melting icydirtball....fatal!
20 June 2018: An insane lie that collimated jets are fatal for mainstream comets.

A lie because he knows the mainstream comet model has no problem explaining collimated jets.

Insane because previously he cited a mainstream paper about the production of highly collimated jets . And then emphasized his knowledge with rants about jet nozzles and chambers for maybe months!
Reality Check 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 Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old Yesterday, 07:55 PM   #2812
Sol88
Master Poster
 
Sol88's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 2,811
Identification of comet Hyakutake's extremely long ion tail from magnetic field signatures Geraint H. Jones*, Andre Balogh* & Timothy S. Horbury

Quote:
The structure's field lines were clearly draped (Fig. 2). Near-radial
solar wind ¯ow would confine the tail to Hyakutake's orbital plane.
The inferred current sheet orientations were indeed consistent with
a tail axis parallel to this plane.
So how's this circuit look?
__________________
"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 Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old Yesterday, 07:56 PM   #2813
Sol88
Master Poster
 
Sol88's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 2,811
Originally Posted by Reality Check View Post
20 June 2018: An insane lie that collimated jets are fatal for mainstream comets.

A lie because he knows the mainstream comet model has no problem explaining collimated jets.

Insane because previously he cited a mainstream paper about the production of highly collimated jets . And then emphasized his knowledge with rants about jet nozzles and chambers for maybe months!
From the rough angled terrain!!!

Yup good one!
__________________
"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 Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old Yesterday, 08:02 PM   #2814
Reality Check
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: New Zealand
Posts: 21,773
Thumbs down An insane delusion that there is a "homogenous solid rock debate"

Originally Posted by Sol88 View Post
.... our little chestnut of comets are homogenous solid rock debate is back on the cards very soon!
20 June 2018: An insane delusion that there is a "homogenous solid rock debate".
Deluded because he has never produced any evidence that comets are homogenous solid rock. All we get is a torrent of ignorance, delusions and lies. That is not a debate.

Insane because he knows about the evidence that comets are ices and dust. That includes sending radio waves through the nucleus of 67P and not having them blocked by rock !
Reality Check 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 Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old Yesterday, 08:05 PM   #2815
Reality Check
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: New Zealand
Posts: 21,773
Thumbs down Acknowledges his lie on mainstream production of jets but with another lie

Originally Posted by Sol88 View Post
From the rough angled terrain!!!
20 June 2018: Acknowledges his lie on mainstream production of jets with but another lie!
It is not jets from "rough angled terrain".

20 June 2018: An insane lie that collimated jets are fatal for mainstream comets.

Last edited by Reality Check; Yesterday at 08:06 PM.
Reality Check 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 Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old Yesterday, 08:10 PM   #2816
Reality Check
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: New Zealand
Posts: 21,773
Thumbs down A "opens a whole new world champ" lie about literally textbook plasma physics

Originally Posted by Sol88 View Post
So here, comet tails, we are NOT using MHD.

opens a whole new world champ!
20 June 2018: A "opens a whole new world champ" lie about literally textbook plasma physics.
Originally Posted by tusenfem View Post
Okay, first "kinetic effects" here means that on the scales that we are looking, the MHD approach cannot be used, and that therefore the particles (ions) will have to be recognized as individuals and not a fluid. This means that the motion of the individual particles needs to be taken into account (an example: the singing comet). It is chapter 2 of the Saas-Fee book on plasma astrophysics (by Don Melrose) that I mentioned a few pages ago.
My emphasis added.

Another lie: It is "the scales that we are looking" that determines whether to use MHD or not to model plasma. Look closely at a comet tail and MHD is appropriate. Look widely at the same comet tail and plasma as particle is appropriate.

This is nothing to do with his many comet delusions.
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.

Last edited by Reality Check; Yesterday at 08:14 PM.
Reality Check 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 Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old Yesterday, 08:15 PM   #2817
Sol88
Master Poster
 
Sol88's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 2,811
Originally Posted by Reality Check View Post
20 June 2018: Acknowledges his lie on mainstream production of jets with but another lie!
It is not jets from "rough angled terrain".

20 June 2018: An insane lie that collimated jets are fatal for mainstream comets.
You do mean this paper Coma morphology of comet 67P controlled by insolation over irregular nucleus??

Quote:
Abstract

While the structural complexity of cometary comae is already recognizable from telescopic observations1, the innermost region, within a few radii of the nucleus, was not resolved until spacecraft exploration became a reality2,3. The dust coma displays jet-like features of enhanced brightness superposed on a diffuse background1,4,5. Some features can be traced to specific areas on the nucleus, and result conceivably from locally enhanced outgassing and/or dust emission6,7,8. However, diffuse or even uniform activity over topographic concavity can converge to produce jet-like features9,10. Therefore, linking observed coma morphology to the distribution of activity on the nucleus is difficult11,12. Here, we study the emergence of dust activity at sunrise on comet 67P/Churyumov–Gerasimenko using high-resolution, stereo images from the OSIRIS camera onboard the Rosetta spacecraft, where the sources and formation of the jet-like features are resolved. We perform numerical simulations to show that the ambient dust coma is driven by pervasive but non-uniform water outgassing from the homogeneous surface layer. Physical collimations of gas and dust flows occur at local maxima of insolation and also via topographic focusing. Coma structures are projected to exhibit jet-like features that vary with the perspective of the observer. For an irregular comet such as 67P/Churyumov–Gerasimenko, near-nucleus coma structures can be concealed in the shadow of the nucleus, which further complicates the picture.
__________________
"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 Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old Yesterday, 08:23 PM   #2818
Reality Check
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: New Zealand
Posts: 21,773
Thumbs down A lie that a "Coma morphology" paper is mainstream production of all jets

Originally Posted by Sol88 View Post
20 June 2018: A lie that a "Coma morphology" paper is mainstream production of all jets.

This paper is about a class of "jet-like features" of the coma as in the abstract he quotes.

The mainstream production of comet jets is textbook astronomy..

Last edited by Reality Check; Yesterday at 08:26 PM.
Reality Check 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 Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old Yesterday, 08:29 PM   #2819
Reality Check
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: New Zealand
Posts: 21,773
Thumbs down Lying ion tail circuit question to derail from his many comet delusions

Originally Posted by Sol88 View Post
So how's this circuit look?
20 June 2018: Lying ion tail circuit question to derail from his many comet delusions.
A lie because there is no circuit in the quote.

Identification of comet Hyakutake's extremely long ion tail from magnetic field signatures, published in 2000 by Geraint H. Jones*, Andre Balogh* & Timothy S. Horbury
is about a real comet and its ion tail.

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.

Last edited by Reality Check; Yesterday at 08:34 PM.
Reality Check 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 Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old Yesterday, 09:38 PM   #2820
Sol88
Master Poster
 
Sol88's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 2,811
It's like herding cats with you Reality Check!

Was I correct in my assumption that MHD does not apply at comets?
__________________
"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 Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old Yesterday, 09:51 PM   #2821
Little 10 Toes
Graduate Poster
 
Little 10 Toes's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 1,890
Hey Sol88, is there any reason why you keep avoiding answering simple questions? This thread is to talk about the "EC/EU" theory.

Just in case you can't remember:

Originally Posted by Indagator View Post
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

I am so looking forward to your expert answers, and your expert predictive mathematical model! Share with us your wisdom, Sol88! Show us the value of your electric comet!
Little 10 Toes is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old Yesterday, 09:55 PM   #2822
Sol88
Master Poster
 
Sol88's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 2,811
http://www.internationalskeptics.com...2#post12252682

Originally Posted by tusenfem View Post
why would dust not be negatively charged, who is expecting only positive dust?
dust gets charged in two ways, electrons sticking to the surface (so negative) or by uv radiation kicking off electrons (so positive)
in the end it all depends on the balance of the (dare i say it) currents to the particles which result comes out.
Mmmm...kinetic plasma effects play a dominate role in dusty plasma environment at a comet.
__________________
"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 Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old Yesterday, 11:48 PM   #2823
jonesdave116
Graduate Poster
 
jonesdave116's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Posts: 1,682
Originally Posted by Sol88 View Post
It's like herding cats with you Reality Check!

Was I correct in my assumption that MHD does not apply at comets?
No. You obviously can't read. I linked you to a 2006 paper that explained when it was appropriate to use MHD. Why don't you read it, instead of being wilfully ignorant?
__________________
“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 Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old Yesterday, 11:54 PM   #2824
jonesdave116
Graduate Poster
 
jonesdave116's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Posts: 1,682
Originally Posted by Sol88 View Post
is if you stand far enough back!!

When we zoom in on the nucleus we see NO COLLIMATED jets but when we zoom out...booya!!!

Not a problem for the ELECTRIC COMET but for a melting icydirtball....fatal!
Errr, and the constituents of the jet include solid ice? How is that not a problem for the electric woo? How is the total failure to see any electric woo, even when the spacecraft passes through an outburst, not a problem for the electric comet woo? You have zero evidence for any of this nonsense, and zero scientifically valid mechanisms. How many missions? How many years? And you are still batting zero. All you've got is the word salad, lies and obfuscation of conmen like Thornhill.
__________________
“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 Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old Yesterday, 11:59 PM   #2825
jonesdave116
Graduate Poster
 
jonesdave116's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Posts: 1,682
Originally Posted by Sol88 View Post
http://www.internationalskeptics.com...2#post12252682



Mmmm...kinetic plasma effects play a dominate role in dusty plasma environment at a comet.
Yes, as we already knew long before this mission. So why is it news to you? And please explain why all this idiotic woo is not happening to asteroids, to get us back to the questions that you simply cannot 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 Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old Today, 12:02 AM   #2826
tusenfem
Master Poster
 
tusenfem's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 2,243
Originally Posted by Sol88 View Post
From just a few pages back!!! So do the thread a favour and go read those few pages where I argued MHD does not apply and the SUPER DUPER SPACE PLASMA PHYSICIST played coy, dam well knowing what was what!
You are an ingrateful little, aren't you?
MHD: field aligned currents, flux tubes, shocks
non-MHD: double layers
With "electrostatic shock" I guess you mean a discharge?

Originally Posted by Sol88 View Post
YOU, the mainstream, including plasma EXPERTS posting on this forum, were still arguing black and blue with me on the above point
Nope, not arguing with you, correcting you, however you are unable to actually learn.

Originally Posted by Sol88 View Post
But now ohhh... it happens but so what?????
WHAT is the IT that happens?

Originally Posted by Sol88 View Post
Well chumps, that's the electric comet, bang on right there!!!
Where?

Originally Posted by Sol88 View Post
KINETIC EFFECTS: Charge separation, Applied electric fields, Particle acceleration, Plasma heating, Plasma instabilities, Birkeland currents, Force free currents, electric circuits AND DOUBLE LAYERS etc etc....!!!
As yet, there have been no double layers found around the comet.
All the other stuff is just basic plasma physics, although ...
Birkeland currents are a specific current system in the Earth's magnetosphere
Force free currents do not exist

Originally Posted by Sol88 View Post
All from MHD being total CRAP at modelling REAL plasma/s!
Oh boy, you were so happy and kind when I explained what MHD was and when it is applicable.
And now as Mr. Hyde to your Jekyll you lash out again, which clearly shows again that you are unwilling to learn anything.
To quote a famous American person: "Sad!"

Originally Posted by Sol88 View Post
What do you want? You want me to do a full kinetic calculation for something that can, without any loss of generality, be done much more quickly by MHD?
Or do you want me to use MHD when I clearly cannot do so?
What?
And by the way where are the papers from the EC gang? Should they not actually write some real papers using the data from Giotto, Vega, ICE and Rosetta, which all can be found at [ulr=http://pds.nasa.gov/]NASA's PDS[/url] and ESA's PSA. The electric comet is there for you to be found.
__________________
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 Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old Today, 12:27 AM   #2827
jonesdave116
Graduate Poster
 
jonesdave116's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Posts: 1,682
Quote:
Well chumps, that's the electric comet, bang on right there!!!
Errr, would this be the evidence-free woo that states:

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.
And;

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.
And;

Quote:
Intermittent and wandering arcs erode the surface and burn it black, leaving
the distinctive scarring patterns of electric discharges.
And;

Quote:
The jets flare up and move over the nucleus irregularly, leaving scars typical of electric discharge machining

About time we had some explanation of why this impossible woo failed to materialise, don't you think? And why this impossible woo isn't happening to asteroids, or on the Moon? What are you hiding from?
__________________
“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 Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old Today, 12:50 AM   #2828
tusenfem
Master Poster
 
tusenfem's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 2,243
Originally Posted by Sol88 View Post
Plasma – Surface Interactions with Airless Bodies in Space and the Laboratory J.Deca(PI),X.Wang

Any ambipolar electric fields around 67/P, I wonder?
As you have already discussed this, I would say yes.

Originally Posted by Sol88 View Post
When those surface electric fields become strong enough to turn rock to dust and accelerate it away in collimated jets, what would we observe?
no

Originally Posted by Sol88 View Post
Is there a need any more for J. Agarwal's fictitious requirement for some sub surface energy storage? Evidence of sub-surface energy storage in comet 67P from the outburst of 2016 July 03 doi:10.1093/mnras/stx2386
yes, experiments in Braunschweig in the group of Jurgen Blum have shown that the parameters that Skorov used are most likely wrong by at least a factor of 3, which means that dust can be lifted from the surface. (shown at the Rosetta SWT a few weeks ago)

Originally Posted by Sol88 View Post
Now that MHD arguments is done and dusted, we can talk about REAL PLASMA PHENOMENA that CAN happen around comets!
Now that you have shown you are full of ****, why don't we discuss anything anymore
__________________
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 Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old Today, 12:53 AM   #2829
tusenfem
Master Poster
 
tusenfem's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 2,243
Originally Posted by Sol88 View Post
MHD equations that tusenfem was very coy in explaining or kinetic plasma equations that enable kinetic plasma effects that I've been banging on about since the start of the ELECTRIC COMET THREAD!
I am not coy, I have explained EVERYTHING into detail for you, the thing is YOU DO NOT LISTEN AND ARE UNWILLING TO LEARN ANYTHING ABOUT REAL PLASMA PHYSICS.
Do you use general relativity to calculate how long it takes for an apple to fall from the tree to the ground, or do you use Newton?
__________________
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 Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old Today, 12:54 AM   #2830
jonesdave116
Graduate Poster
 
jonesdave116's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Posts: 1,682
Sol88, 2018

Quote:
All from MHD being total CRAP at modelling REAL plasma/s!
(As if he'd know what a plasma was even if he fell over one!)

And, from 2006, referencing even older work:

Quote:
Finally, as outlined above, weak comets may not be well described by MHD mod-
els. In order to study the solar wind interactions with low production rate comets,
hybrid models have been developed. These simulations, which treat comets in the
kinetic regime, show the effect of cycloid motion of the picked up cometary ions
and the induced asymmetries (Lipatov et al., 1997, 2002; Motschmann and K¨uhrt,
2006). A recent application of hybrid models studied the transition of the cometary
environment from a kinetic-dominated regime to a fluid-dominated regime (Bag-
donat and Motschmann, 2002b) with specific application to comet 46P/Wirtanen
(which was the intended Rosetta target before the change to 67P/CG). The study
examines cometary ion structures as they transition from the classical bow shock,
diamagnetic cavity structure of strong comets to the cycloidal tail and non-line(a)r
Mach cones typical of weak comets. In this paper, we repeat a similar study for the
new Rosetta target, comet 67P/CG
The Plasma Environment of Comet 67P/Churyumov-Gerasimenko Throughout the Rosetta Main Mission
Hansen, K. C. et al. (2006)
https://www.researchgate.net/publica...a_Main_Mission

And, of course, as far as the electric comet woo goes, it doesn't really matter how they modelled it, does it? What matters is what was observed and detected. And we can safely say that none of the physics defying woo quoted upthread actually happened. Game 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
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 Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old Today, 12:55 AM   #2831
tusenfem
Master Poster
 
tusenfem's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 2,243
Originally Posted by Sol88 View Post
http://www.internationalskeptics.com...2#post12252682



Mmmm...kinetic plasma effects play a dominate role in dusty plasma environment at a comet.
what do you think "kinetic effects" are?
please enlighten us
__________________
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 Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old Today, 02:01 AM   #2832
jonesdave116
Graduate Poster
 
jonesdave116's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Posts: 1,682
Originally Posted by tusenfem View Post
Do you use general relativity to calculate how long it takes for an apple to fall from the tree to the ground, or do you use Newton?
Well, in the universe that Sol inhabits, you would need to specify the charge on the apple, and the charge on the Earth, and factor that into the fact that G is a variable, controlled by EM effects. Answer? It might fall upwards, we simply don't know!
__________________
“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 Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old Today, 05:25 AM   #2833
jonesdave116
Graduate Poster
 
jonesdave116's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Posts: 1,682
Quote:
yes, experiments in Braunschweig in the group of Jurgen Blum have shown that the parameters that Skorov used are most likely wrong by at least a factor of 3, which means that dust can be lifted from the surface. (shown at the Rosetta SWT a few weeks ago)
The abstracts from that meeting are downloadable, here:
https://www.cosmos.esa.int/web/rosetta-swt-49/schedule

Having had a read through them, I'm guessing the presentation Tusenfem is referring to is the one by Neuhaus, Gundlach & Blum;

Outgassing of CO2 /H20-ice mixtures through dust layers - an experimental approach


There is also an abstract from Küppers, et al (incl. Skorov), which looks again at the possibilities for the dust activity:

Ways out of the cometary activity paradox
__________________
“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 Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old Today, 05:51 AM   #2834
jonesdave116
Graduate Poster
 
jonesdave116's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Posts: 1,682
Quote:
And by the way where are the papers from the EC gang? Should they not actually write some real papers using the data from Giotto, Vega, ICE and Rosetta, which all can be found at [ulr=http://pds.nasa.gov/]NASA's PDS[/url] and ESA's PSA. The electric comet is there for you to be found.
No, no , no! That would be waaaaay too tricky. It must have taken me all of 90 seconds to get to the position where I could download the Giotto magnetometer data! Why bother, when you can just cherry-pick and obfuscate press releases?
__________________
“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 Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old Today, 08:18 AM   #2835
Dancing David
Penultimate Amazing
 
Dancing David's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Posts: 39,122
Sol88: Blather
Rinse, repeat
__________________
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 offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Reply

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 01:43 PM.
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.