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 11th April 2020, 04:33 PM   #2081
Sol88
Philosopher
 
Sol88's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 6,596
We are lucky comets were not blasted from planets by grand canyon sized lightning just last Tuesday!
__________________
“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 11th April 2020, 04:35 PM   #2082
jonesdave116
Philosopher
 
jonesdave116's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Posts: 5,173
Originally Posted by Sol88 View Post
Did!

September 2005: Astronomers, using data from NASA's Sptizer Space Telescope and Deep Impact, come up with a list of compounds thought to be the recipe for planets, comets and other bodies in the solar system. Included are silicates, or sand, clay, carbonates, iron-bearing compounds and even aromatic hydrocarbons.

Yup, rock!

you my trolley friend have FAILED, along with the dirtysnowball!
Nope. No rock ever detected at a comet. Not my fault that you can't tell the difference between rock and dust. So, you have no rock, no discharge woo, no explanation for all the ice excavated, no explanation for the volatiles, and no clue whatsoever about any relevant science. Nothing has changed.
__________________
“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 11th April 2020, 04:37 PM   #2083
jonesdave116
Philosopher
 
jonesdave116's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Posts: 5,173
Originally Posted by Sol88 View Post
We are lucky comets were not blasted from planets by grand canyon sized lightning just last Tuesday!
They were never anything to do with planets. And nobody sane believes otherwise. Like I said, stick to mythology woo - science is not your thing.
__________________
“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 11th April 2020, 04:53 PM   #2084
Sol88
Philosopher
 
Sol88's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 6,596
Originally Posted by jonesdave116 View Post
And where else would it come from, given that we see ice, we see outgassing, and we see the bow shock as predicted? There is no other scientifically valid explanation. Unscientific crap dreamed up by Velikovskians does not count as science. Just faith in non-science and woo. Go get an education. Your woo failed 20 years before it was born, and you can't deal with it.
Analytic model of comet ionosphere chemistry

Quote:
Abstract

Context. We consider a weakly to moderately active comet and make the following simplifying assumptions: (i) The partial ionization frequencies are constant throughout the considered part of the coma. (ii) All species move radially outward with the same constant speed. (iii) Ion-neutral reactions affect the chemical composition of the ions, but ion removal through dissociative recombination with free electrons is negligible.

Aims. We aim to derive an analytical model for the radial variation of the abundances of various cometary ions.

Methods. We present two methods for retrieving the ion composition as a function of r. The first method, which has previously been used frequently, solves a series of coupled differential equations. The new method introduced here is based on probabilistic arguments and is analytical in nature.

Results. For a pure H2O coma, the resulting closed-form expressions yield results that are identical to the standard method, but are computationally much less expensive.

Conclusions. In addition to the computational simplicity, the analytical model provides insight into how the various abundances depend on parameters such as comet production rate, outflow speed, and reaction rate coefficients. It can also be used to investigate limiting cases. It cannot easily be extended to account for a radially varying flow speed or dissociative recombination in the way a code based on numerical integrations can.
jonesdave116's, tusenfem and reality checks dirtysnowball model!
__________________
“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; 11th April 2020 at 04:54 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 11th April 2020, 04:59 PM   #2085
jonesdave116
Philosopher
 
jonesdave116's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Posts: 5,173
Originally Posted by Sol88 View Post
Analytic model of comet ionosphere chemistry



jonesdave116's, tusenfem and reality checks dirtysnowball model!
It is not our model you clown. It is what is observed. Now go away. You really haven't got a clue, and trying to explain science to you is the equivalent of trying to teach QM to a chimp. We all get it - you believe in a bunch of scientifically impossible, Velikovskian woo, and have a religious devotion to it. However, it bears no relation to reality. It has nothing to do with science, and everything to do with lies, obfuscation and ignorance. Which pretty much describes the whole of the EU cult's 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 11th April 2020, 05:10 PM   #2086
Sol88
Philosopher
 
Sol88's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 6,596
Originally Posted by jonesdave116 View Post
It is not our model you clown. It is what is observed. Now go away. You really haven't got a clue, and trying to explain science to you is the equivalent of trying to teach QM to a chimp. We all get it - you believe in a bunch of scientifically impossible, Velikovskian woo, and have a religious devotion to it. However, it bears no relation to reality. It has nothing to do with science, and everything to do with lies, obfuscation and ignorance. Which pretty much describes the whole of the EU cult's woo.
No, that's your model!

Quote:
We therefore assume that the H2O num-ber density,nN, follows a simplified version of the Haser (1957)model:
Ouch!
__________________
“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 11th April 2020, 05:12 PM   #2087
jonesdave116
Philosopher
 
jonesdave116's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Posts: 5,173
Originally Posted by Sol88 View Post
No, that's your model!



Ouch!
WTF are you on about now, you clown? Ice is observed. Water is observed. That falsifies your woo. Deal with your failed woo. Stop trying to understand things that are well beyond your intellectual capabilities. Stick to your woo, and its complete 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 11th April 2020, 07:27 PM   #2088
Sol88
Philosopher
 
Sol88's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 6,596
Originally Posted by jonesdave116 View Post
WTF are you on about now, you clown? Ice is observed. Water is observed. That falsifies your woo. Deal with your failed woo. Stop trying to understand things that are well beyond your intellectual capabilities. Stick to your woo, and its complete failure.


Water does not falsifie the EC, rock falsifies the dirtysnowball!

Analytic model of comet ionosphere chemistry

is exactly why you've been misguided for some time now!

As per the standard MOSTLY icy comets, the dirtysnowball.

Your failed model, jonesy!

Quote:
When a comet comes sufficiently close to the Sun, it becomes active, releasing volatiles from near-surface layers. Dust grains leave the comet with the gas flow.
Analytic model of comet ionosphere chemistry

Is this correct?
__________________
“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 11th April 2020, 09:59 PM   #2089
Sol88
Philosopher
 
Sol88's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 6,596
Originally Posted by jonesdave116 View Post
No it isn't. They are talking about the coma when the comet is weakly outgassing. It is not relevant when the comet is highly active. No electric woo in the DC, remember? Hell, we've only known that since the mid-80s! Do keep up.
Quote:
This indicates that the ions were not collisionally coupled to the neutrals and implies that the ion-neutral drag force was not responsible for balancing the outside magnetic pressure at the cavity boundary. It also suggests the existence of an ambipolar electric field to accelerate the ions, at least inside the cavity.
Ion velocity and electron temperature inside andaround the diamagnetic cavity of comet 67P

jonesdave116, wrong again!

Oh, an electric field!
Quote:
and your outgassing...The neutral gas number density has here been assumed to follow which is a simplified version of the Haser (1957) model, consistent
with Rosetta observations (H¨assig et al. 2015).

Still the Haser model???

Why? Its overestimating the amount of ice from which the water come from that leads to OH seen in the coma!
__________________
“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; 11th April 2020 at 10:04 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 11th April 2020, 11:43 PM   #2090
Sol88
Philosopher
 
Sol88's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 6,596
Quote:
This underscores that by neglecting the ambipolar electric field the ion neutral
decoupling distance may be severely overestimated.
Quote:
This is
in line with conclusions drawn from our previous numerical work (Vigren&Eriksson 2017) and may explainwhy effective ion speeds, derived from measurements by the Langmuir Probe and the Mutual Impedance Probe, are markedly higher than the expected neutral outflow velocity, even within the diamagnetic cavity of 67P (Odelstad et al. 2018).

jonesdave neglects the ambipolar electric field, quite well. therefore it doesn't exist because there is NO MECHANISM!
__________________
“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 11th April 2020, 11:52 PM   #2091
Sol88
Philosopher
 
Sol88's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 6,596
Quote:
Unless effectively removed via dissociative recombination (a process which is more efficient the slower the electrons are),the cold electron population grows and continues to do so up to a point where the resulting reduced electron temperature leads to a diminishing (or even reversal) of the ambipolar electric field that then can allow the cold electrons to escape outwards. This in turn leads back to an outward-pointing ambipolar electric field. Such a scenario would be qualitatively consistent with the time-varying cavity boundary observed on Rosetta (Goetz et al. 2016).
On the ion-neutral coupling in cometary comae

tusenfem? you had inquired up the post there awhile back, on ion and electrons leavin ghte same electric field. Tricky these electric fields!

Your welcome.
__________________
“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 12th April 2020, 01:43 AM   #2092
tusenfem
Master Poster
 
tusenfem's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 2,981
Originally Posted by Sol88 View Post
Seems difficult for you, tusenfem?
If you ask me:

"If the field it is aligning too keeps chop'n and chang'n, is the electric field also following suite?"

yeah, then that's above my paygrade.

Originally Posted by Sol88 View Post
Can a magnetic field aligned ambipolar electric field exists in a magnetically turbulent environment?
Is it turbulent?
__________________
Scientific progress goes *BOINK* -- Calvin & Hobbes
twitter: @tusenfem -- Super Duper Space Plasma Physicist
tusenfem is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 12th April 2020, 01:45 AM   #2093
tusenfem
Master Poster
 
tusenfem's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 2,981
Originally Posted by Sol88 View Post
I'm talking about the grand poobah Current carrying double layers
Then you can show us the necessity of why a current carrying double layer is created, and please explain too how this double layer is different from an ambipolar electric field.
__________________
Scientific progress goes *BOINK* -- Calvin & Hobbes
twitter: @tusenfem -- Super Duper Space Plasma Physicist
tusenfem is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 12th April 2020, 01:50 AM   #2094
tusenfem
Master Poster
 
tusenfem's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 2,981
Originally Posted by Sol88 View Post
Is this correct?
When Erik writes that, then it is probably correct, yes. He is a very good scientist.
__________________
Scientific progress goes *BOINK* -- Calvin & Hobbes
twitter: @tusenfem -- Super Duper Space Plasma Physicist
tusenfem is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 12th April 2020, 01:53 AM   #2095
tusenfem
Master Poster
 
tusenfem's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 2,981
Originally Posted by Sol88 View Post
On the ion-neutral coupling in cometary comae

tusenfem? you had inquired up the post there awhile back, on ion and electrons leavin ghte same electric field. Tricky these electric fields!
Obviously, this is not the same electric field. If you could only read.
__________________
Scientific progress goes *BOINK* -- Calvin & Hobbes
twitter: @tusenfem -- Super Duper Space Plasma Physicist
tusenfem is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 12th April 2020, 03:42 AM   #2096
Sol88
Philosopher
 
Sol88's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 6,596
Originally Posted by tusenfem View Post
If you ask me:

"If the field it is aligning too keeps chop'n and chang'n, is the electric field also following suite?"

yeah, then that's above my paygrade.



Is it turbulent?
Rhetorical question really, isn't it.
__________________
“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 12th April 2020, 03:44 AM   #2097
Sol88
Philosopher
 
Sol88's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 6,596
Originally Posted by tusenfem View Post
Obviously, this is not the same electric field. If you could only read.
Multiple electric fields...

Ahhh, stair-step, current carrying, double layers!


__________________
“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 12th April 2020, 05:39 PM   #2098
Sol88
Philosopher
 
Sol88's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 6,596
Right now all that's out of the way, perhaps we can move on to the circuit that is the electric comet!

We have a tail that goes all the way out to the heliopause, wheres the other end?

The comet is the focus.
__________________
“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 12th April 2020, 08:40 PM   #2099
Sol88
Philosopher
 
Sol88's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 6,596
Originally Posted by tusenfem View Post
Obviously, this is not the same electric field. If you could only read.
Obviously,
Quote:
Their basic point is that due to the reversal of the magnetic field, the convectional electric field in the flowing plasma also changes direction.
This leads to the reversal of the electrodynamic acceleration of a charged dust grain as a magnetic sector boundary sweeps by it (see equation (5)).
DUSTY PLASMA EFFECTS IN COMETS: EXPECTATIONS FOR ROSETTA

Think I read in one of your papers about the fields line draping.

Quote:
Results. During the dayside excursion, the magnetic field cone angle changed several times, which means that the magnetic field direction changes from pointing sunward to anti-sunward. This is caused by the changing directions of the interplanetary magnetic field that is transported toward the comet.
Dynamic field line draping at comet 67P/Churyumov-Gerasimenko during the Rosetta dayside excursion

Right, so the electric field can change sign (direction) .

Ions and Dust(electrons) all doing non electroSTATIC stuff!

Happy Times!
__________________
“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 12th April 2020, 11:25 PM   #2100
Reality Check
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: New Zealand
Posts: 28,506
Exclamation The usual insane lies, delusions, insults, etc. addressed since 6 July 2009

Originally Posted by Sol88 View Post
...
Sol88 shows how deep his decades of insanity is yet again.
The thousands of insane lies, delusions, insults, etc. since 6 July 2009 from Sol88 about his cult's electric comet and electric Sun dogma.
Most of the recent insanity from Sol88

This post: Insane delusions.
The real world physics is that when the comet coma does not block the solar wind, then dust can be electrostatically charged by impacts with sola wind ions and electrons. Most of the dust is transported across the surface. Some dust may be ejected. His insane delusion of a coma before there is a coma does nothing !

An enormous spate of insane lies and delusions from Sol88
Next post: His persistent insanity about the Haser model, etc.
Sol88 shows he is utterly insane by citing and quoting that comets are not rock !
Beneath the surface of Comet 67P says that 67P is a highly porous mixture of ice and dust grains (not rock!). The question before the Rosetta mission was whether comets made of a mixture of ice and dust grains had large voids. The CONSERT result was no large voids.

A spate of Sol88 showing he is utterly insane by citing and quoting from ices and dust comet papers.

Next post: Sol88 showing he is utterly insane with deluded gibberish, citing a ice and dust comet paper, pathological lies about posts and posters.
Next post: Pathological lies about posts and posters
Electric fields exist in plasma. Not every electric field in plasma is a double later. The electric field between a single ion and a single electron is not a DL. The electric field between two concentrations of electrons is not a DL. etc. etc.

Sol88 insanely highlights that a DL electric field accelerates all charges that enter it which is what all electric field do to charges!

Next post: A demented question.
Next post: Just demented!
We have explained what the ambipolar electric field is many times over the last few years.
Next post: Usual insane lies.
Comets and KBO objects averaged may have less water than a specific type of asteroid.
Persistent insanity that science must not progress.
Next post: Insane lies about M.Volwerk.
Next post: Lists his pathological lies about posts and posters.
Next post: Sol88 shows that he is utterly insane yet again.
A sentence of insane gibberish. His insanity of "ice". His insanity that comets have no ice on their surface when we detected it!
The RSI data + the volume of 67P showed that the bulk of 67P is not his insanity of actual rock.
An insane "ENERGETIC part of the equation" question when the Sun exists !
Next post: Insanity of citing a ice and dust comet paper and lying about it yet again.
Next post: Insane lies about posts and posters.
jonesdave116 wrote Lying again. What a surprise. The only people who keep prattling on about the 1950s model are the electric idiots. It is their strawman, and is of no relevance to their failed woo.
That is the 1950's Whipple model. Sol88 and his demented cult "keep prattling on" about the 1950's Whipple mode as an irrelevant strawman to derail from their debunked dogma.
Next post: "Old papers" insanity, insane lies about posts and posters.
jonesdave116 wrote Idiot. What was excavated from just below the surface of Tempel1? What is exposed by landslides at 67P? What is floating around Hartley 2? (about surface ice) and we get an insane rant about old papers, Sol88's insanity of being ale to count to 3, etc.
Next post: Demented questions and persists with Haser formula insanity.
Next post: Insane lies about science and his demented dogma.
We expect bodies other than planets to have clays and carbonates.
His demented dogma demands that comets have compounds unique to rocky plants including Earth. Basalt, granite, limestone, sandstone, maybe a fossil or two !
Next post: "Nope" insanity of promising to continue with his insanity of the past 11 years and he does so !
Insanity of quoting from a ice and dust comet paper and lying about it yet again.
Next post: His insanity of demented questions to derail from his deranged dogma.
Next post: His current insanity that the Haser model is Whipple's model
Next post: His persistent insanity the old papers (1950's) cannot be used. Insane lies about posts and posters.
Next post: Insanity of citing a ice and dust comet paper.
Next post: Demented question.
Next post: Insanity of citing a ice and dust comet paper.
Next post: Insane lies about posts and posters.
JeanTate asked What does Chief Acolyte Talbott have to say? and got nothing from Talbott or the other prophets in reply.
Next post: MHD and Haser model insanity, and a demented question.
Next post: Insanity of citing a ice and dust comet paper and usual gibberish follows.
Next post: "it is a discharge. It’s an electric current" insanity.
tusenfem wrote You would not know a discharge if it hit you in the you know where. and Sol88 insanely confirms his complete ignorance of what an electric discharge is!
Next post: Demented lying questions.
The insane insults of the deceased Michael Francis A'Hearn and all astronomers by Sol88 linking them with Sol88's demented dogma, etc.
Next post: Utterly insane lie that the mainstream even know about this demented cult's dogma.
No sane person, let alone an astronomer, will believe even in the first tenet of the holy book from the demented Thunderbolts cult that comets are actual rock. The physical evidence is that comets have density less than water and the surface and interior of comets are ice and dust.

An insane "the electrons. Poor neglected brother of the ion..." lie even with a .
Next post: Insane lies about science and his demented dogma.
Clays and carbonates are expected at comets. No basalt, granite, limestone, sandstone, etc. has ever been seen at a comet.
Next post: Demented question irrelevant to his deranged dogma.
Next post: Shows how insane he is by quoting a demented web page from the deranged Wal Thornhill blog !
Next post: Insane lies about posts and posters.
jonesdave116 wrote Nope. And you don't need stuff going on in the coma, you need wandering arcs burning the surface black, and EDM (lol) zapping non-existent rock, to produce non-existent O- ions... about Sol88's demented dogma that does not use any "sciencey plasma stuff" !+
Next post: Insane lies about science
Next post: Demented question.
Next post: Insane lies about posts and posters.
jonesdave116 wrote Is irrelevant. As explained umpteen times, the ambipolar field exists due to the need to maintain quasi-neutrality ... and gets another irrelevant rant and links to Sol99's demented cult.
Next post: Insane lies about science, posts and posters.
Next post: Insane lies about science, posts and posters.
Next post: Insane lies about science, posts and posters.
Next post: Insane lies about science, posts and posters.
Next post: Insane lies about science and his demented dogma.
Next post: Insanity of citing a ice and dust comet paper.
Next post: Insane lies about science, posts and posters.
Next post: Insanity of citing a ice and dust comet paper.
Next post: Insanity of citing a ice and dust comet paper.
Next post: Insane lies about posts and posters.
Next post: Insanity of citing a ice and dust comet paper.
Next post: "Rhetorical question" idiocy when tusenfem tries to make sense of a demented question.
Next post: "Multiple electric fields" and his DLs at comets insanity.
Next post: Utter "the circuit that is the electric comet" insanity.
Comet tails do not go all the way out to the heliopause (~121 AU (18 billion km) from the Sun). Comet tail star at a comet !
Next post: Insanity of citing a ice 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 13th April 2020, 01:23 AM   #2101
Lukraak_Sisser
Illuminator
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Posts: 4,260
Originally Posted by Sol88 View Post
Right now all that's out of the way, perhaps we can move on to the circuit that is the electric comet!

We have a tail that goes all the way out to the heliopause, wheres the other end?

The comet is the focus.
One end is the comet from which the tail comes from sublimation, the other 'end' is where the particle concentration appearing from sublimation become indistinguishable from the normal solar wind.

There is no circuit as the entire EU is complete and total unfounded nonsense which has never been detected in nature ever, and, as pointed out to you repeatedly, would actually require nature to behave opposite from the way it does.

In fact, in the alternate EU universe Earth would never support life as it would be scoured by the electric currents needed for the fantasy.
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 13th April 2020, 01:55 AM   #2102
Reality Check
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: New Zealand
Posts: 28,506
Exclamation A 2001 litany of lies from the deranged Wal Thornhil

Originally Posted by Sol88 View Post
Sol88's insanity of emphasizing how insane his demented dogma is with a blog entry from the deranged Wal Thornhil.
"Comet Borrelly rocks core scientific beliefs" is a litany of lies and delusions from 2001. It illustrates how the demented Thunderbolts cult depends on dogma from their holy men. What he writes there has not changed in 19 years even with the Deep Impact and Rosetta scientific results.

Thornhil starts with the insanity that cometary science is based on "core beliefs" when it is based on the working laws of physics and empirical evidence. And then it gets worse!
  1. A lie that comets originate "from an invisible cloud of icy objects located about 1000 times the distance of Pluto".
    Comets are shown by their orbits to originate from the region of the outer planets (Jupiter, etc.) to the Kuiper belt to the Oort cloud. There are Encke-type comets (do not reach Jupiter), Jupiter-family comets like Halley, etc.
    The long term comets from the Oort cloud are what he refers to.
  2. An idiotic argument from incredibility that Oort cloud objects cannot be perturbed inward.
    Space is big, really really big. So what?
  3. An insane "the solar wind is merely a wind that blows the gases from a comet away from the Sun to form a tail" lie.
    Astronomers know that the solar wind is a plasma. The interaction of the soar wind with a come tail is electromagnetically complex. To a first approximation, the solar wind as a gas + coma as a gas gives a wind forming a tail. Add in that the are plasmas and we get the complex structure of a ion tail.
  4. An insane "belief ... all objects in the universe are electrically neutral" lie.
    The physical evidence from spacecraft is that the solar wind has equal numbers of negative and positive charges - it is neutral. The physical evidence of ices on comets + laws of physics means sublimating ices on comets produce neutral gases.
  5. An idiotic argument from incredibility that comet tails are long thus a fantasy if electrical current.
  6. An insane "Cometary jets are not required to cause the anomalous acceleration of comets" lie.
    The fact is that comets have jets ejecting mass even in his demented dogma. They will produce non-gravitational forces. We measure comets changing orbits according to these non-gravitational forces as predicted and not anomalous. His insanity is that someone with a physics degree thinks the mass leaving a comet will not exert a force (F=ma!).
  7. An insane "The dirty snowball model of comets was proposed by Fred Whipple in 1950 and has since become dogma" lie.
    The dirty snowball model was proposed by Fred Whipple in 1950. It was accepted because it explained the existing evidence. There has been no evidence that says that his model is wrong.
  8. A "baffled" lie about the Comet Halley flare in 1991.
    For example: A kick from the solar wind as the cause of comet Halley's February 1991 flare in October 1991. Astronomers were not baffled a year later. They were certainly no baffled 10 years later!
  9. A "Ices are not required to drive the comet jets" lie.
    Sublimating ices do explain the shape of jets so long as you are not insane enough to think that is all that is going on. It is sublimating ices + the shape of any pit or fissure + the interaction with the coma.
  10. A "Comet Hale-Bopp emitted more dust than could be explained by subliming ices" lie (no source).
  11. An insane "puzzling discovery of negatively charged atoms in the inner coma of comet Halley" (no source).
    Negatively charged atoms in comets was expected, e.g. Negative ions in comets Apr. 1981.
    Thornhill knew this as he spins a fantasy about "solar hearing" not being adequate somehow create them. What creates the ions is the neutral atoms grabbing electrons from solar wind.
  12. An insane "The low density calculated for some comets ..." lie.
    All comets are measured to have a density less than water and much less then rock. They are not rock!
    Followed immediately by
  13. Utter "no difference between the appearance of a comet nucleus and an asteroid" stupidity.
    The appearance of an object says nothing about its density.
  14. Delusions about 2060 Chiron
    A delusion that we must immediately identify a comet as a comet!
    When a comet is far from the Sun without a coma and tail, discovery then will probably get it labelled as an asteroid when it is has a asteroid-like orbit. That was the case with 2060 Chiron which was the first of the centaurs found. It was labelled as an asteroid initially on 1 November 1977 because it did not show cometary behavior at that time. Later observation in February 1988 (brightening, coma and tail in 1993) showed cometary behavior so it was changed to be the comet 95P/Chiron.
  15. A "Yet asteroids are thought to be much more evolved bodies than comets".
    They formed at the same time. The main difference is where they formed - asteroids in the inner system where there was little ice, comet in the outer system where there was lots of ice.
  16. "And if gravity is a dipolar electrical effect..." insanity.
  17. A deluded lie that Io has surface darkening due to electric discharges.
    "Io's colorful appearance is the result of materials deposited by its extensive volcanism, including silicates (such as orthopyroxene), sulfur, and sulfur dioxide.". Volcanism was seen from the Voyager flyby images in 1979 and confirmed by Galileo in 1995.
  18. His demented dogma that electric discharges magically cause surface darkening.
  19. An insane "belief ... a comet is simply a supersonic object moving through the solar wind" lie.
  20. An insane "belief ... ices on the surface of a comet nucleus sublime in the Sun’s warmth to form a huge enveloping cloud of gas" lie.
    The above 2 points are physical facts.
    A comet does move at "supersonic" speeds through the solar wind so we do get a bow shock at comets.
    It is a physical fact that ices on comets near to the Sun will sublimate just as they do in experiments with the same conditions here on Earth. Anyone who has been to a party with dry ice suspects that for CO2.
  21. A blatant "Scientists surprised at "dust and gas was being emitted from just a few small craters"" lie.
    Astronomers expected to see dust and gas being emitted from the pits that sublimating ice will form. These pits will be roughly circular. These pits are not craters which are holes formed by impacting objects. The deeper the pit, obviously the more collimated the gas and dust jet thus the expected "pencil thin jets".
  22. An ignorant "problem of concentrating the heat of the Sun at the bottoms of holes" delusion.
    It is the entire nucleus of the comet that is heated by the Sun. The bottoms of the pits are almost as hot as the surroundings.
    Same ignorant delusion for "dark, heat absorbing regions".
  23. The usual "caught by surprise" insanity we see for this demented prophet.
    What looks like a press release that the Deep Space 1 flyby on September 21, 2001 found a symmetric solar wind around it. But the nucleus was "was off to one side, shooting out a great jet of material.". When he lied about Deep Impact on Tempel 1 he used the same "surprise" insanity by only using press releases about initial reactions of scientists.
  24. Demented fantasies that his dogma.
    Electric arc delusions to explain the pits
    A "no “shock wave” to be understood in the usual sense" when we have the physically real solar wind hitting a physically real comet coma. There will be a bow wave in the usual sense.
  25. The usual "caught by surprise" insanity we see for this demented prophet.
    It was a surprise in 1996 that Comet Hyakutake. We now know hat all comets emit x-rays and why.
  26. An insane lie that highly ionized atoms in the solar wind grabbing electrons is an "electric current".
    Highly ionized atoms in the solar wind grab electrons from the comet coma and emit x-rays. The neutral overall solar wind and the neutral overall coma remain electrically neutral overall. What happens is charge within the 2 interacting plasmas is redistributed.
  27. A "Turbulent flow in supersonic shocks has become the catch-all..." lie.
    The physical fact is that in supersonic shocks the flows can be turbulent. But this is a bow wave.
  28. A "forbidden oxygen line at 1128Ĺ" = intense electric field lie.
    Forbidden spectral lines are forbidden because at normal gas densities, the frequency of collisions does not allow them. They are allowed in space because collisions are much less likely.
  29. A "At comet Giacobini-Zinner ICE detected ions around the spacecraft in very highly collimated beams (electric currents) coming from the direction of the Sun" lie (no source)
    Followed by deluded gibberish.
  30. "The surface complexity of the comet nucleus is due to electrical arc erosion" insanity.
    Electric arcs tend to wear down high points and leave a smooth surface.
  31. An inane "the story of ices subliming in the sunlight" lie.
    Ices sublimate even below the surface of a comet because the entire body of a comet is heated by the Sun. We even see jets from the dark side of the comet!
  32. Insane comparison to Phobos (a moon of Mars).
  33. A insane "Crater chains are routinely misinterpreted by geologists as indicative of sub-surface faults" lie.
    Volcanic crater chains are correctly interpreted by geologists as indicative of sub-surface magna deposing moving along a line, e.g. the Hawaiian Islands.
    Astronomy crater chains are correctly interpreted by astronomers as the ejects from the first carter creating more craters.
  34. Insanity of an comet quote from 1871 and his "scientific beliefs" insanity.
    That 1871 is accidently correct - comets do "owe many of their peculiar phenomena to electrical action" but nothing that was known about in 1871.
  35. Describes Deep Impact which 4 years later resulting in his insane lies about "confirmed predictions".
    Insane because the last time I checked he was still making himself into an liar with his 15 year old web page!

Last edited by Reality Check; 13th April 2020 at 01:58 AM.
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 13th April 2020, 03:24 AM   #2103
tusenfem
Master Poster
 
tusenfem's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 2,981
So, what's up now with the "magnetic field aligned electric field" that Sol88 is all hyped about? Well, let's go to the paper by Andrey Divin and his co-workers A Fully Kinetic Perspective of Electron Acceleration around a Weakly Outgassing Comet.

Indeed, in the abstract of the paper they say that "We identify and characterize the magnetic fieldaligned ambipolar electric field that ensures quasi-neutrality and traps warm electrons." So note the reason why this ambipolar electric field is there, to trap the warm electrons.

What is the magnetic field structure around this weakly outgassing comet? From the introduction we find out that:

Originally Posted by Divin et al.
The global morphology of the solar wind–comet interaction is presented in Figure 1. Using color-coded magnetic field lines we highlight the 3D structure of the magnetic pile-up region. The maximum field magnitude in this region reaches up to 2.6 times the interplanetary magnetic field magnitude, Bsw. The magnetic field drapes around and passes through the region of the highest density near the nucleus (Koenders et al. 2016).
So, the magnetic field is draped around the outgassing cometary nucleus, as it should, and what was already described by Alfvén in 1957. That means that there is no radially directed magnetic field around the cometary nucleus.

Then there is a lot of stuff that I will skip, which the interested reader can read for themselves, as the paper is open access. And I will move to the discussion section.

So, in the first two sentences of the discussion we find out the following:

Originally Posted by Divin et al.
In the case of a weakly outgassing comet the solar wind electrons move to balance the positively charged cometary ions (Deca et al. 2017). In order to maintain quasi-neutrality, i.e., to increase the solar wind electron density in regions where the cometary ion density is substantially higher, a strong parallel electric field needs to be generated to locally and temporarily trap electrons.
Now this already goes directly against all Sol88's believes. Yes, because of the different charge of the electrons and ions they move into different directions, those are the laws of electrodynamics, but the laws of plasma physics say, in a variation onto "Natura horror vacui", "plasma abhors charge separation" (sorry I am not a Latinist, so I cannot turn it into a Latin quote).

And thus it is found in a "3D fully kinetic electromagnetic simulations of the interaction of the solar wind with a comet" that in order to avoid this build-up of net charge an (ambipolar) electric field traps the electrons.

Now, the potential along the field line is calculated and they come up with a ΦP and then they say what happens to the electrons:

Originally Posted by Divin et al.
Electrons that have a parallel kinetic energy greater than ΦP that pass through the region gain energy while traversing into the potential well, and lose it again on their way out.

Those that enter the potential well with a parallel kinetic energy below the local ΦP remain trapped and bounce along the magnetic field line while their motion is simultaneously altered by the local E×B drift component.
This means that the electric field structure is a "potential well" which is every but a double layer. (One could say it is a double double layer, which we will not do.)

I will leave reading the conclusions of the paper to the interested reader. This reader will then also find out that only partially reading abstracts and looking for buzz words in the paper does not suffice to understand what is going on.
__________________
Scientific progress goes *BOINK* -- Calvin & Hobbes
twitter: @tusenfem -- Super Duper Space Plasma Physicist
tusenfem is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 13th April 2020, 03:35 AM   #2104
tusenfem
Master Poster
 
tusenfem's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 2,981
Originally Posted by Sol88 View Post
Right now all that's out of the way, perhaps we can move on to the circuit that is the electric comet!
Well ..... no

Originally Posted by Sol88 View Post
The comet is the focus.
Ohhh, exciting, explain.
__________________
Scientific progress goes *BOINK* -- Calvin & Hobbes
twitter: @tusenfem -- Super Duper Space Plasma Physicist
tusenfem is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 13th April 2020, 03:37 AM   #2105
tusenfem
Master Poster
 
tusenfem's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 2,981
Originally Posted by Sol88 View Post
Think I read in one of your papers about the fields line draping.

Dynamic field line draping at comet 67P/Churyumov-Gerasimenko during the Rosetta dayside excursion
And you would be right that you have "read" that, and thus you would understand that if the field lines are draped, than any field aligned electric field would be similarly draped and not have a radial component towards the comet.
__________________
Scientific progress goes *BOINK* -- Calvin & Hobbes
twitter: @tusenfem -- Super Duper Space Plasma Physicist
tusenfem is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 13th April 2020, 12:34 PM   #2106
Sol88
Philosopher
 
Sol88's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 6,596
How did the TRAPPIST-1 planets get their water?

Quote:





At the same time, the fact that these planets orbit tightly around a red dwarf star has given rise to doubts that these three planets could maintain an atmosphere or liquid water for very long. According to new research by an international team of astronomers, it all comes down to the composition of the debris disk that the planets formed from and whether or not comets were around to distribute water afterward.

The team responsible for this research was led by Sebastian Marino of the Max Planck Institute for Astronomy (MPIA) and included members from the University of Cambridge, the University of Warwick, the University of Birmingham, the Harvard-Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics (CfA) and the MPIA. The study that describes their findings recently appeared in the Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society.

In terms of how the solar system came to be, astronomers are of the general consensus that it formed over 4.6 billion years ago from a nebula of gas, dust and volatiles (AKA the Nebular Hypothesis). This theory has it that these elements coalesced in the center first, undergoing gravitational collapse to create the sun. Over time, the rest of the material formed a disk around the sun that eventually accreted to form the planets.

Within the outer reaches of the solar system, objects left over from the formation settled into a large belt containing vast amounts of iceteroids—otherwise known as the Kuiper Belt. In accordance with the Late Bombardment Theory, water was distributed to Earth and throughout the solar system by countless comets and icy objects that were knocked out of this belt and sent hurdling inwards.
Science by consensus to give us the standard dirtysnowball model.


Problems!!!

just a bit of background on why mainstream science do science by consensus!

I see no plasma, charged dust, electric currents and electric fields!

This is standard mainstream astrophysical process, why neglect it?
__________________
“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 13th April 2020, 12:39 PM   #2107
Sol88
Philosopher
 
Sol88's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 6,596
Originally Posted by Lukraak_Sisser View Post
One end is the comet from which the tail comes from sublimation, the other 'end' is where the particle concentration appearing from sublimation become indistinguishable from the normal solar wind.

There is no circuit as the entire EU is complete and total unfounded nonsense which has never been detected in nature ever, and, as pointed out to you repeatedly, would actually require nature to behave opposite from the way it does.

In fact, in the alternate EU universe Earth would never support life as it would be scoured by the electric currents needed for the fantasy.
In fact, in the alternate EU universe Earth would never support life as it would be scoured by the electric currents needed for the fantasy??


How? We see it on Io. Detected? I believe we have but remember mainstream consensus does not agree with the Electric Universe (EU) so its gas, uncharged dust, gravity and magnetic connection and some very complicated abstract theoretical math that can only be understood by those in the club making the story up.

And as long as there is a consensus...
__________________
“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 13th April 2020, 12:47 PM   #2108
Sol88
Philosopher
 
Sol88's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 6,596
Originally Posted by tusenfem View Post
So, what's up now with the "magnetic field aligned electric field" that Sol88 is all hyped about? Well, let's go to the paper by Andrey Divin and his co-workers A Fully Kinetic Perspective of Electron Acceleration around a Weakly Outgassing Comet.

Indeed, in the abstract of the paper they say that "We identify and characterize the magnetic fieldaligned ambipolar electric field that ensures quasi-neutrality and traps warm electrons." So note the reason why this ambipolar electric field is there, to trap the warm electrons.

What is the magnetic field structure around this weakly outgassing comet? From the introduction we find out that:



So, the magnetic field is draped around the outgassing cometary nucleus, as it should, and what was already described by Alfvén in 1957. That means that there is no radially directed magnetic field around the cometary nucleus.

Then there is a lot of stuff that I will skip, which the interested reader can read for themselves, as the paper is open access. And I will move to the discussion section.

So, in the first two sentences of the discussion we find out the following:



Now this already goes directly against all Sol88's believes. Yes, because of the different charge of the electrons and ions they move into different directions, those are the laws of electrodynamics, but the laws of plasma physics say, in a variation onto "Natura horror vacui", "plasma abhors charge separation" (sorry I am not a Latinist, so I cannot turn it into a Latin quote).

And thus it is found in a "3D fully kinetic electromagnetic simulations of the interaction of the solar wind with a comet" that in order to avoid this build-up of net charge an (ambipolar) electric field traps the electrons.

Now, the potential along the field line is calculated and they come up with a ΦP and then they say what happens to the electrons:



This means that the electric field structure is a "potential well" which is every but a double layer. (One could say it is a double double layer, which we will not do.)

I will leave reading the conclusions of the paper to the interested reader. This reader will then also find out that only partially reading abstracts and looking for buzz words in the paper does not suffice to understand what is going on.

Tell us about YOUR dynamic and nested draping magnetic fields in relation to the above magnetic field aligned ambipolar electric field?

Its not a passive electric field :just trapping electrons then now is it champ, it a current carrying double layer!

is a measure for the work performed by the electric field.

What's sustaining the "electric field"?

And obviously none of this electric magnetic field nonsense has any affect of EUV and solar photons. The only input mainstream have.
__________________
“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; 13th April 2020 at 12:48 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 13th April 2020, 12:53 PM   #2109
Sol88
Philosopher
 
Sol88's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 6,596
The dust is also carrying a large amount of charge as per Cometary Dust

Quote:
As a rule of thumb, a dust particle collects about 700 extra electrons per unit particle volume equivalent radius (measured in μm) and unit electric potential difference between the particle surface and the surrounding plasma (measured in V). This means that in the solar wind a particle of 1 μm size can have about 104 extra electrons.
So how does that fit into
Quote:
Electrons that have a parallel kinetic energy greater than ΦP that pass through the region gain energy while
traversing into the potential well, and lose it again on their way out. Those that enter the potential well with a parallel kinetic energy below the local ΦP remain trapped and bounce along the magnetic field line while their motion is simultaneously altered by the localE×B drift component.
Just ignore them???

Not Andrey Divin's problem?
__________________
“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 13th April 2020, 12:54 PM   #2110
Sol88
Philosopher
 
Sol88's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 6,596
It's all realy just a moot point as the general consensus is solid
__________________
“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 13th April 2020, 01:19 PM   #2111
Sol88
Philosopher
 
Sol88's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 6,596
Originally Posted by tusenfem View Post
So, what's up now with the "magnetic field aligned electric field" that Sol88 is all hyped about? Well, let's go to the paper by Andrey Divin and his co-workers A Fully Kinetic Perspective of Electron Acceleration around a Weakly Outgassing Comet.

Indeed, in the abstract of the paper they say that "We identify and characterize the magnetic fieldaligned ambipolar electric field that ensures quasi-neutrality and traps warm electrons." So note the reason why this ambipolar electric field is there, to trap the warm electrons.

What is the magnetic field structure around this weakly outgassing comet? From the introduction we find out that:



So, the magnetic field is draped around the outgassing cometary nucleus, as it should, and what was already described by Alfvén in 1957. That means that there is no radially directed magnetic field around the cometary nucleus.

Then there is a lot of stuff that I will skip, which the interested reader can read for themselves, as the paper is open access. And I will move to the discussion section.

So, in the first two sentences of the discussion we find out the following:



Now this already goes directly against all Sol88's believes. Yes, because of the different charge of the electrons and ions they move into different directions, those are the laws of electrodynamics, but the laws of plasma physics say, in a variation onto "Natura horror vacui", "plasma abhors charge separation" (sorry I am not a Latinist, so I cannot turn it into a Latin quote).

And thus it is found in a "3D fully kinetic electromagnetic simulations of the interaction of the solar wind with a comet" that in order to avoid this build-up of net charge an (ambipolar) electric field traps the electrons.

Now, the potential along the field line is calculated and they come up with a ΦP and then they say what happens to the electrons:



This means that the electric field structure is a "potential well" which is every but a double layer. (One could say it is a double double layer, which we will not do.)

I will leave reading the conclusions of the paper to the interested reader. This reader will then also find out that only partially reading abstracts and looking for buzz words in the paper does not suffice to understand what is going on.
All this from a comet that is of a meteoric matrix with less water than chondrite's.

Bloody amazing!

Then there's the charged 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 13th April 2020, 01:23 PM   #2112
Sol88
Philosopher
 
Sol88's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 6,596
Originally Posted by Lukraak_Sisser View Post
One end is the comet from which the tail comes from sublimation, the other 'end' is where the particle concentration appearing from sublimation become indistinguishable from the normal solar wind.

There is no circuit as the entire EU is complete and total unfounded nonsense which has never been detected in nature ever, and, as pointed out to you repeatedly, would actually require nature to behave opposite from the way it does.

In fact, in the alternate EU universe Earth would never support life as it would be scoured by the electric currents needed for the fantasy.
That's what common sense ans general consensus of dust and gas in the solar wind! you are correct.

but


Encounter of the Ulysses Spacecraft with the Ion Tail of Comet M CNaught
Quote:
Abstract

Comet McNaught was the brightest comet observed from Earth in the last 40 years. For a period of five days in early 2007 February, four instruments on the Ulysses spacecraft directly measured cometary ions and key properties of the interaction of the comet's ion tail with the high-speed solar wind from the polar regions of the Sun. Because of the record-breaking duration of the encounter, the data are unusually comprehensive. O3+ ions were detected for the first time in a comet tail, coexisting with singly charged molecular ions with masses in the range 28-35 amu. The presence of magnetic turbulence and of ions with energies up to ~200 keV indicate that at a distance of ~1.6 AU from the comet nucleus, the ion tail of comet McNaught had not yet reached equilibrium with the surrounding solar wind.

How far before equilibrium is reached? And were are all the electrons and 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 13th April 2020, 02:22 PM   #2113
JeanTate
Illuminator
 
Join Date: Nov 2014
Posts: 4,001
Originally Posted by jonesdave116 View Post
Well, we don't need to ask Talbott. He already told us what he expected over 5 years ago in this very forum. And hasn't been back since!

http://www.internationalskeptics.com...postcount=2441

And, as per my previous post, re Sol finding his discharge woo in association with pretty pics, Talbott says;



Not gone well, has it? I can't imagine why he hasn't been back
Right.

Seems Sol88 hasn't yet got the memo ...

It's a pity Sol88 has yet to put the time and effort into writing up the results from his research random quote mining. Just think, the fame (a double Nobel surely just the start)! the fortune (BLP/Mills? a mere rounding error)! And so on.

No need to put up with searing posts by tusenfem, jd16, LS, RC, ...
JeanTate is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 13th April 2020, 03:06 PM   #2114
Reality Check
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: New Zealand
Posts: 28,506
Exclamation Most of the recent insanity from Sol88 from ~10 March 2020

The thousands of insane lies, delusions, insults, etc. since 6 July 2009 from Sol88 about his cult's electric comet and electric Sun dogma already show how pathological Sol88 is about lying. But Sol88 insists on persisting with lies so:
29 items of pathological lies, etc. since ~10 March 2020
  1. Sol88's insanity of emphasizing how insane his demented dogma is with a blog entry from the deranged Wal Thornhil.
  2. New insanity about scientific consensus.

Last edited by Reality Check; 13th April 2020 at 03:53 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 13th April 2020, 03:32 PM   #2115
Reality Check
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: New Zealand
Posts: 28,506
Exclamation The usual insane lies, delusions, insults, etc. addressed since 6 July 2009

Originally Posted by Sol88 View Post
...
The thousands of insane lies, delusions, insults, etc. since 6 July 2009 from Sol88 about his cult's electric comet and electric Sun dogma.
Most of the recent insanity from Sol88 from ~10 March 2020

This post: Sol88's insanity of citing mainstream science to detail from his demented dogma.
Next post: Sol88's insanity of lies about his demented dogma.
What makes Earth not be a comet and so inhabitable in his demented dogma is the low eccentricity of its orbit. His demented dogma means that every body with a high enough eccentricity must be a comet. Sol88's insanity includes active asteroids as comets so that eccentricity includes hundreds of thousands of detected asteroids and million of others that magically do not show as comets ! However I do not remember the eccentricity being as low as Earth's.

An insane "math that can only be understood by those in the club" lie. There are many resources available for just about any one to learn GR and the Lambda-CDM model. It is not easy. You start with high school science which seems absent in Sol88 and his demented cult ! First year university physics and math will give a basic understanding with some struggling. Second year physics and math makes things easier.

Next post: Demented questions and his DL insanity to derail from his demented dogma.
Next post: His insane obsession with charged dust to derail from his demented dogma.
We know that dust is charged at comets and how it is charged (neutral when ejected fro the nucleus + collects electrons fro the solar wind).
Demented questions to derail from his demented dogma.
Next post: An utterly insane "the general consensus is solid " lie.
He links to his other insane post where he cites How did the TRAPPIST-1 planets get their water?
The general consensus (formed by, e.g. the fact that we see planets forming in proto solar systems from a disk of ice and dust ) in the scientific community is for solar system formation is the Nebular Hypothesis scientific theory. Water was "was distributed to Earth and throughout the solar system by countless comets and icy objects".
Next post: Usual insane rant about mainstream science to derail from his demented dogma.
Next post: Insanity of citing mainstream science to derail from his demented dogma.
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 13th April 2020, 03:52 PM   #2116
Reality Check
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: New Zealand
Posts: 28,506
Exclamation New insanity about scientific consensus

New insanity about scientific consensus.
Sceince is not done by consensus. But trust in science is established by the scientific consensus. For example, when 98% of climate scientists say that global warming is primarily driven by our emissions of CO2, we can be very confident that this is correct.
So when there is a scientific consensus that the Solar System (and others) formed via the Nebular hypothesis or more exactly the solar nebular disk model , we can be fairly confident that they are correct.

The nebular hypothesis is the historical name for the Solar System forming from a collapsing molecular cloud (nebular). The solar nebular disk model is the modern model that explains many of the features of the Solar System.
Quote:
The widely accepted modern variant of the nebular theory is the solar nebular disk model (SNDM) or solar nebular model.[1] It offered explanations for a variety of properties of the Solar System, including the nearly circular and coplanar orbits of the planets, and their motion in the same direction as the Sun's rotation. Some elements of the original nebular theory are echoed in modern theories of planetary formation, but most elements have been superseded.
Sol88 and his demented cult are in deranged denial of the real world as usual.
  • We see giant molecular clouds.
    Basic physics says that they are unstable. Enough variation in density will cause them to collapse into fragments and form stars. That variation can come about randomly or from external factors such as local nova.
  • We see the very young stars that the collapse of molecular clouds form.
  • We see protoplanetary disks.
  • We see planets in protoplanetary disks forming and clearing their orbits.
  • We detect comets around other systems (exocomets).
    That may include systems that only have gas giants which would be yet another debunking of Sol88's demented dogma (no rocky planets for his magic of blasting from rocky planets !).
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 13th April 2020, 04:36 PM   #2117
Sol88
Philosopher
 
Sol88's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 6,596
Originally Posted by JeanTate View Post
Right.

Seems Sol88 hasn't yet got the memo ...

It's a pity Sol88 has yet to put the time and effort into writing up the results from his research random quote mining. Just think, the fame (a double Nobel surely just the start)! the fortune (BLP/Mills? a mere rounding error)! And so on.

No need to put up with searing posts by tusenfem, jd16, LS, RC, ...
Not after the currency, not after the "fame", I'd much rather the truth.

We live in an ELECTRIC UNIVERSE!
__________________
“No rock. Any charge separation is limited. The electric field is pointing in the wrong direction. Currents are doing nothing.” Jonesdave116.

“The 'electric comet' is physically IMPOSSIBLE to model using mainstream science! PERIOD! True story! End of story!” Indagator
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 13th April 2020, 05:33 PM   #2118
Sol88
Philosopher
 
Sol88's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 6,596
Originally Posted by Lukraak_Sisser View Post
One end is the comet from which the tail comes from sublimation, the other 'end' is where the particle concentration appearing from sublimation become indistinguishable from the normal solar wind.

There is no circuit as the entire EU is complete and total unfounded nonsense which has never been detected in nature ever, and, as pointed out to you repeatedly, would actually require nature to behave opposite from the way it does.

In fact, in the alternate EU universe Earth would never support life as it would be scoured by the electric currents needed for the fantasy.
One end is the comet from which the tail comes from sublimation, the other 'end' is where the particle concentration appearing from sublimation become indistinguishable from the normal solar wind

Why would it become indistinguishable?


Gas into a vacuum...
__________________
“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 13th April 2020, 07:17 PM   #2119
Reality Check
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: New Zealand
Posts: 28,506
Exclamation The usual insane lies, delusions, insults, etc. addressed since 6 July 2009

Originally Posted by Sol88 View Post
...
The thousands of insane lies, delusions, insults, etc. since 6 July 2009 from Sol88 about his cult's electric comet and electric Sun dogma.
Most of the recent insanity from Sol88 from ~10 March 2020

This post: "electric universe" insanity.
We live in a inverse with at least 4 forces. Sol88 and his demented cults have the insane delusion that the universe is dominated by electromagnetism. That is not even true in the Solar System !
Next post: Demented questions to derail from his demented dogma.
Lukraak_Sisser wrote One end is the comet from which the tail comes from sublimation, the other 'end' is where the particle concentration appearing from sublimation become indistinguishable from the normal solar wind.
The reply is a demented question and an insane "gas into vacuum" lie. It is gas into gas (a comet tail fading into the interplanetary medium and solar wind).
ETA:
Next post: Insane rant (the interplanetary medium and solar wind exist and do slow comet tails until they merge with them) .
Next post: Demented rant (the interplanetary medium and solar wind exist and do slow comet tails until they merge with them).

For other sane people:
Lukraak_Sisser did get "indistinguishable" almost wrong. The solar wind is mostly H. A comet ion tail has additional molecules from sublimating ices. So we could trace the ion tail a long way by the extra molecules until the tail became so diffuse that our instruments could not distinguish it fro the solar wind. Ditto for the dust tail, samples would contain dust unique to comets until the dust is so diffuse we cannot collect it.

Last edited by Reality Check; 13th April 2020 at 08:38 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 13th April 2020, 07:59 PM   #2120
Sol88
Philosopher
 
Sol88's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 6,596
Ding ding ding, we have a winner folks!

The reply is a demented question and an insane "gas into vacuum" lie. It is gas into gas (a comet tail fading into the interplanetary medium and solar wind).

__________________
“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
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 03:08 AM.
Powered by vBulletin. Copyright ©2000 - 2021, 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.