The Electric Comet Theory /SAFIRE Part V

[Reality Check]

Originally Posted by Sol88

...

The thousands of insane lies, delusions, insults, etc. since 6 July 2009 from Sol88 about his cult's electric comet and electric Sun dogma.
Sol88 gives us an insane rant from Wal Thornhill about stars.
Sol88 gives us an insane video from Donald Scott: Voyager 2 and our Solar System's Birkeland Current
Yet another insane rant from Sol88. Insane lie about asteroid Bennu. Insane ignorance about plasma sheaths. Etc.

Sol88's usual insanity which emphasizes Sol88's insane religious dogma that comets are actual rock (no ices or a demented fantasy of "little ices") blasted from rocky planets by electric discharges between planets including recent times (witnessed by us!) and that these rocks discharge in a massive solar electric field. This insanely tears the rock apart and puts gas and dust into the coma and forms their insanity of jets as electrical discharges !

Sol88's usual insane lies about science.
Water ice found on the surface of comet 67P (in 2016!) https://phys.org/news/2016-01-ice-su...comet-67p.html

[Reality Check]

Originally Posted by Sol88

...

The thousands of insane lies, delusions, insults, etc. since 6 July 2009 from Sol88 about his cult's electric comet and electric Sun dogma.
Sol88 gives us an insane rant from Wal Thornhill about stars.
Sol88 gives us an insane video from Donald Scott: Voyager 2 and our Solar System's Birkeland Current
Yet another insane rant from Sol88. Insane lie about asteroid Bennu. Insane ignorance about plasma sheaths. Etc.

Sol88's usual insanity which emphasizes Sol88's insane religious dogma that comets are actual rock (no ices or a demented fantasy of "little ices") blasted from rocky planets by electric discharges between planets including recent times (witnessed by us!) and that these rocks discharge in a massive solar electric field. This insanely tears the rock apart and puts gas and dust into the coma and forms their insanity of jets as electrical discharges !

Sol88's usual insane lies about science.
Sol88's insane fantasies about "energetic electrons already active on the surface of 67P way before any neutral gas" .

The reality is a 2015 paper with a mainstream model (not Sol88's insane religious dogma) that predicts the solar wind hitting the surface of 67P and electrostatically charging dust particles enough to transport them across the surface with possible ejection of submicron grains.
Surface charging and electrostatic dust acceleration at the nucleus of comet 67P during periods of low activity

Quote:

We have investigated through simulation the electrostatic charging of the nucleus of Comet 67P/Churyumov–Gerasimenko during periods of weak outgassing activity. Specifically, we have modeled the surface potential and electric field at the surface of the nucleus during the initial Rosetta rendezvous at 3.5 AU and the release of the Philae lander at 3 AU. We have also investigated the possibility of dust acceleration and ejection above the nucleus due to electrostatic forces. Finally, we discuss these modeling results in the context of possible observations by instruments on both the Rosetta orbiter and the Philae lander.

[Reality Check]

Originally Posted by Sol88

...

The thousands of insane lies, delusions, insults, etc. since 6 July 2009 from Sol88 about his cult's electric comet and electric Sun dogma.
Sol88 gives us an insane rant from Wal Thornhill about stars.
Sol88 gives us an insane video from Donald Scott: Voyager 2 and our Solar System's Birkeland Current
Yet another insane rant from Sol88. Insane lie about asteroid Bennu. Insane ignorance about plasma sheaths. Etc.

Sol88's usual insanity which emphasizes Sol88's insane religious dogma that comets are actual rock (no ices or a demented fantasy of "little ices") blasted from rocky planets by electric discharges between planets including recent times (witnessed by us!) and that these rocks discharge in a massive solar electric field. This insanely tears the rock apart and puts gas and dust into the coma and forms their insanity of jets as electrical discharges !

Yet another insane rant from Sol88. Insane lies about posts and posters, about models he is totally ignorant about, that an approximation is an error, that ices are not observed, etc.

Sol88's usual insane lies about science, posts and posters.
No one has said that neutral atoms stops the solar wind when we know that comet coma are plasma (but Sol88 does not !).

An insane "gas is assumed based on assumptions" lie when we detect ices that must sublimate to produce gas, we detect neutral gas, plasma is partially ionized gas !

Next post: Sol88's usual insane lies about science, posts and posters.
Sol88's persistent and insane "model that overestimates the amount of needed to sustain said modeled production of water" lie.

Next post: Sol88's usual insane lies about science, posts and posters.

1. Sol88's next insane lie: "they’ve made the same error as Volwerk et al, Currents in Cometary Comae"
   A Haser radial density distribution is an approximation, not an error.
   Sol88 is abysmally ignorant and cannot say whether this approximation affects the results at all !
2. Sol88's next insane lie: "The comet MUST be mostly ice to make the Haser model correct."
   Sol88 knows outgassing is the input to the Haser model. We measure or estimate the outgassing of ices sublimating Q and plug that into the Haser model.
3. Insane "most of the water is in a region ice has never been observerd ..." gibberish.
   We have detected water ice on 6P and other comets.
   We have detected ice on 6P and other comets.
   We have removed subsurface water ices with Deep Impact on Tempel 1.
4. Sol88's next insane lie: "Radial expansion of gas and dust is NOT observed to come from the nucleus".
   The radial expansion is an approximation that no one with 2 brain cells expects to observe !
   We DO observe expansion of gas and dust coming from the nucleus.

[Sol88]

Originally Posted by jonesdave116

No, you are too dense to get it. It is seen. By MIRO. As outlined in a paper 4.5 frigging years ago. To nobodies surprise. At 3.9 AU.

http://blogs.esa.int/rosetta/2015/06...n-comets-coma/

Distribution of water around the nucleus of comet 67P/Churyumov-Gerasimenko at 3.4 AU from the Sun as seen by the MIRO instrument on Rosetta
Biver, N. et al. (2015)
https://www.aanda.org/articles/aa/ab...a26094-15.html

Quote:

Other evidence that there is some backflow of water from day- to nightside (even if not dominant close to the nucleus) is the clear detection of water emission (Figs. 2 and 6) beyond the nucleus on the nightside at levels that are often higher than against the nucleus

Interesting point, considering by now we are NOT talking about neutral molecules.

Backflow? Of charged matter? Interestingly the dust is also negatively charged and makes quite the show in the night sky.

So, jonesdave116, “water” and dust everywhere!!

But not enough ice to make comets mostly ice but enough dust to make comets mostly rock...

[Sol88]

Originally Posted by Reality Check

The thousands of insane lies, delusions, insults, etc. since 6 July 2009 from Sol88 about his cult's electric comet and electric Sun dogma.
Sol88 gives us an insane rant from Wal Thornhill about stars.
Sol88 gives us an insane video from Donald Scott: Voyager 2 and our Solar System's Birkeland Current
Yet another insane rant from Sol88. Insane lie about asteroid Bennu. Insane ignorance about plasma sheaths. Etc.

This insanely tears the rock apart and puts gas and dust into the coma and forms their insanity of jets as electrical discharges !

Sol88's usual insane lies about science.
Sol88's insane fantasies about "energetic electrons already active on the surface of 67P way before any neutral gas" .

The reality is a 2015 paper with a mainstream model (not Sol88's insane religious dogma) that predicts the solar wind hitting the surface of 67P and electrostatically charging dust particles enough to transport them across the surface with possible ejection of submicron grains.
Surface charging and electrostatic dust acceleration at the nucleus of comet 67P during periods of low activity

And I posit this process never stops just becomes more active as the electric stress on the nucleus grows.

Solar wind ions not needed, highly energetic electrons trapped within the “diamagnetic” cavity do.

This also incorporates the negatively charged dust we observe coming from the nucleus in showers or “jets”. This process removes material AND electrons.

This would leave the rocky nucleus with fewer electrons and less overall charge differential with the solar plasma.

Remember the charged dust we do see everywhere jonesdave116?

[Sol88]

Originally Posted by Reality Check

The thousands of insane lies, delusions, insults, etc. since 6 July 2009 from Sol88 about his cult's electric comet and electric Sun dogma.
Sol88 gives us an insane rant from Wal Thornhill about stars.
Sol88 gives us an insane video from Donald Scott: Voyager 2 and our Solar System's Birkeland Current
Yet another insane rant from Sol88. Insane lie about asteroid Bennu. Insane ignorance about plasma sheaths. Etc.

Sol88's usual insanity which emphasizes Sol88's insane religious dogma that comets are actual rock (no ices or a demented fantasy of "little ices") blasted from rocky planets by electric discharges between planets including recent times (witnessed by us!) and that these rocks discharge in a massive solar electric field. This insanely tears the rock apart and puts gas and dust into the coma and forms their insanity of jets as electrical discharges !

Yet another insane rant from Sol88. Insane lies about posts and posters, about models he is totally ignorant about, that an approximation is an error, that ices are not observed, etc.

Sol88's usual insane lies about science, posts and posters.
No one has said that neutral atoms stops the solar wind when we know that comet coma are plasma (but Sol88 does not !).

An insane "gas is assumed based on assumptions" lie when we detect ices that must sublimate to produce gas, we detect neutral gas, plasma is partially ionized gas !

Next post: Sol88's usual insane lies about science, posts and posters.
Sol88's persistent and insane "model that overestimates the amount of needed to sustain said modeled production of water" lie.

Next post: Sol88's usual insane lies about science, posts and posters.

1. Sol88's next insane lie: "they’ve made the same error as Volwerk et al, Currents in Cometary Comae"
   A Haser radial density distribution is an approximation, not an error.
   Sol88 is abysmally ignorant and cannot say whether this approximation affects the results at all !
2. Sol88's next insane lie: "The comet MUST be mostly ice to make the Haser model correct."
   Sol88 knows outgassing is the input to the Haser model. We measure or estimate the outgassing of ices sublimating Q and plug that into the Haser model.
3. Insane "most of the water is in a region ice has never been observerd ..." gibberish.
   We have detected water ice on 6P and other comets.
   We have detected ice on 6P and other comets.
   We have removed subsurface water ices with Deep Impact on Tempel 1.
4. Sol88's next insane lie: "Radial expansion of gas and dust is NOT observed to come from the nucleus".
   The radial expansion is an approximation that no one with 2 brain cells expects to observe !
   We DO observe expansion of gas and dust coming from the nucleus.

Abundances and spatial distributions of H 2 O and CO 2 at comet 9P/Tempel 1 during a natural outburst A’Hearn was already on the money back then... comets are mostly rock.

Quote:

7. Conclusions The results discussed above clearly suggest that CO 2 drove the 2 Jul 2005 outburst. No increase in water production was detected directly after the outburst; however, an enhancement in water was detected in the coma about 3.6 h after the outburst, possibly re- sulting from the sublimation of slow moving icy grains dragged into the coma by the outburst ( Protopapa et al., 2014 ).

I think you and jonesy would best read the papers again and question the assumptions made in regards to dust to gas ratio and the modeling of the gas and its “ice” sources located on/in the nucleus.


Don’t forget my ‘ol mate, Skorov. Is near-surface ice the driver of dust activity on 67P/Churyumov-Gerasimenko

[Reality Check]

Originally Posted by Sol88

...

The thousands of insane lies, delusions, insults, etc. since 6 July 2009 from Sol88 about his cult's electric comet and electric Sun dogma.
Sol88 gives us an insane rant from Wal Thornhill about stars.
Sol88 gives us an insane video from Donald Scott: Voyager 2 and our Solar System's Birkeland Current
Yet another insane rant from Sol88. Insane lie about asteroid Bennu. Insane ignorance about plasma sheaths. Etc.
Yet another insane rant from Sol88. Insane lies about posts and posters, about models he is totally ignorant about, that an approximation is an error, that ices are not observed, etc.

Sol88's usual insanity which emphasizes Sol88's insane religious dogma that comets are actual rock (no ices or a demented fantasy of "little ices") blasted from rocky planets by electric discharges between planets including recent times (witnessed by us!) and that these rocks discharge in a massive solar electric field. This insanely tears the rock apart and puts gas and dust into the coma and forms their insanity of jets as electrical discharges !

Sol88's usual insane lies about science, posts and posters.
Sol88's insane lie that a process that needs the solar wind continues without the solar wind.
More of Sol88 usual insane delusions does not need addressing.

[Reality Check]

Originally Posted by Sol88

...

The thousands of insane lies, delusions, insults, etc. since 6 July 2009 from Sol88 about his cult's electric comet and electric Sun dogma.
Sol88 gives us an insane rant from Wal Thornhill about stars.
Sol88 gives us an insane video from Donald Scott: Voyager 2 and our Solar System's Birkeland Current
Yet another insane rant from Sol88. Insane lie about asteroid Bennu. Insane ignorance about plasma sheaths. Etc.
Yet another insane rant from Sol88. Insane lies about posts and posters, about models he is totally ignorant about, that an approximation is an error, that ices are not observed, etc.

Sol88's usual insanity which emphasizes Sol88's insane religious dogma that comets are actual rock (no ices or a demented fantasy of "little ices") blasted from rocky planets by electric discharges between planets including recent times (witnessed by us!) and that these rocks discharge in a massive solar electric field. This insanely tears the rock apart and puts gas and dust into the coma and forms their insanity of jets as electrical discharges !

Sol88's usual insane lies about science.
Sol88's insane insult that any astronomer believes in Sol88's insane religious dogma.
Sol88's insane lies of rock in ices and dust comet papers.
Abundances and spatial distributions of H 2 O and CO 2 at comet 9P/Tempel 1 during a natural outburst
Is near-surface ice the driver of dust activity on 67P/Churyumov-Gerasimenko

[jonesdave116]

Originally Posted by Sol88

Abundances and spatial distributions of H 2 O and CO 2 at comet 9P/Tempel 1 during a natural outburst A’Hearn was already on the money back then... comets are mostly rock.



I think you and jonesy would best read the papers again and question the assumptions made in regards to dust to gas ratio and the modeling of the gas and its “ice” sources located on/in the nucleus.


Don’t forget my ‘ol mate, Skorov. Is near-surface ice the driver of dust activity on 67P/Churyumov-Gerasimenko

Lol! The idiocy of quoting passages which confirm volatiles in the coma WHICH SHOULDN'T BE THERE ACCORDING TO YOUR WOO!!!
I mean, seriously......................? SMH.

[jonesdave116]

Quote:

A’Hearn was already on the money back then... comets are mostly rock.

Outright lie. No rock ever seen at a comet. If there has been, just link to the detection in a paper, and tell us what kind of rock it was. Igneous? Sedimentary? Metamorphic? I'm sure we'd all be fascinated to read of such a thing.

[jonesdave116]

Originally Posted by Sol88

And I posit this process never stops just becomes more active as the electric stress on the nucleus grows.

Solar wind ions not needed, highly energetic electrons trapped within the “diamagnetic” cavity do.

This also incorporates the negatively charged dust we observe coming from the nucleus in showers or “jets”. This process removes material AND electrons.

This would leave the rocky nucleus with fewer electrons and less overall charge differential with the solar plasma.

Remember the charged dust we do see everywhere jonesdave116?

Utter drivel. No outgassing = no diamagnetic cavity. Charging? What did Philae measure? And why doesn't all this happen at asteroids? How many times do I need to ask the latter? You have no explanation. Only word salad and a quasi-religious belief in unscientific woo.

[jonesdave116]

Originally Posted by Sol88

Interesting point, considering by now we are NOT talking about neutral molecules.

I'm psychic! I told you that you'd be too dense to understand it! Errr, yes, we are talking about neutral molecules! That is what MIRO detects. Figs. 2 & 6 are depictions of the distribution of the detections of the H₂¹⁶O line*, at 556.936 GHz. That is neutral water vapour.

Quote:

Backflow? Of charged matter? Interestingly the dust is also negatively charged and makes quite the show in the night sky.

Nope. Neutrals. And if the dust is negatively charged, it should be flowing from the nightside to the dayside, as the nightside is expected to charge up to relatively high negative values when the solar wind has access to the nucleus.

Quote:

So, jonesdave116, “water” and dust everywhere!!

So, Sol - another complete **** up in terms of your inability to understand a very straightforward paper!

Quote:

But not enough ice to make comets mostly ice but enough dust to make comets mostly rock...

Nobody has claimed that comets are mostly ice for decades. As has been pointed out to you innumerable times. The fact that you keep lying about this is telling. And no rock has ever been detected at a comet.

* MIRO has the ability to discriminate between water vapour that includes different isotopes of oxygen. i.e. O¹⁶, 0¹⁷, O¹⁸.

[Belz...]

Still waiting, Sol.

[Sol88]

Originally Posted by jonesdave116

I'm psychic! I told you that you'd be too dense to understand it! Errr, yes, we are talking about neutral molecules! That is what MIRO detects. Figs. 2 & 6 are depictions of the distribution of the detections of the H₂¹⁶O line*, at 556.936 GHz. That is neutral water vapour.



Nope. Neutrals. And if the dust is negatively charged, it should be flowing from the nightside to the dayside, as the nightside is expected to charge up to relatively high negative values when the solar wind has access to the nucleus.



So, Sol - another complete **** up in terms of your inability to understand a very straightforward paper!



Nobody has claimed that comets are mostly ice for decades. As has been pointed out to you innumerable times. The fact that you keep lying about this is telling. And no rock has ever been detected at a comet.

* MIRO has the ability to discriminate between water vapour that includes different isotopes of oxygen. i.e. O¹⁶, 0¹⁷, O¹⁸.

Yawn...

Wrong model, again

Quote:

To simplify the analysis and reduce the free parameters, we assumed radial outflow at a constant velocity vexp and a Haser radial density distribution.

To simplify...Haser model is wrong.

But all the papers hand there hats on it, except for Martin Pätzold et al

Quote:

The loss from gas, based on ROSINA and MIRO observations, suggests that Fcoma, the dust-to-gas mass ratio of cometary matter in the coma beyond the Hill sphere of the nucleus is of the order of Fcoma ≤ 0.5 and therefore at least six times, and perhaps as much as 14 times, smaller than Fnucleus. It seems that the lost gas mass was overestimated by the instruments.

The Nucleus of Comet 67P/ChuryumovGerasimenko - Part I: The Global View – nucleus mass, mass loss, porosity and implications

Yup using the Haser model, there must be ice everywhere on mostly icy comets. The above paper, whilst poo pooed, is a good indicator that all is not well with the Dirtysnowball.

Or whatever model mainstream now use.

Problem is it’s all hidden.

[Sol88]

So, congratulations to the mainstream scientists that prove water on comets.

Quote:

5. Distribution of water production around the nucleus

We clearly see evidence from Fig. 6 that the gas is nonuni- formly spread around the nucleus.

but well simplified for the likes of jonesdave116.

Now they just have to work out how the jets work and we are underway.

Talking about surface ice, how much was able to sublimate at this distance?

Or this is all subsurface ice?

[Sol88]

Originally Posted by jonesdave116

I'm psychic! I told you that you'd be too dense to understand it! Errr, yes, we are talking about neutral molecules! That is what MIRO detects. Figs. 2 & 6 are depictions of the distribution of the detections of the H₂¹⁶O line*, at 556.936 GHz. That is neutral water vapour.



Nope. Neutrals. And if the dust is negatively charged, it should be flowing from the nightside to the dayside, as the nightside is expected to charge up to relatively high negative values when the solar wind has access to the nucleus.



So, Sol - another complete **** up in terms of your inability to understand a very straightforward paper!



Nobody has claimed that comets are mostly ice for decades. As has been pointed out to you innumerable times. The fact that you keep lying about this is telling. And no rock has ever been detected at a comet.

* MIRO has the ability to discriminate between water vapour that includes different isotopes of oxygen. i.e. O¹⁶, 0¹⁷, O¹⁸.

Nobody has claimed that comets are mostly ice for decades. As has been pointed out to you innumerable times. The fact that you keep lying about this is telling. And no rock has ever been detected at a comet.

But somebody, A’Hearn claimed

Quote:

At the simplest level, a very basic question is whether comets are mostly ice or mostly rock/dirt/refractory material. Whipple’s [2] model of the dirty snowball, the first quantitative model, envisioned cometary nuclei as mostly ice, although our understanding has been evolving more toward mostly rock,

Sorry, jonesy for A’Hearn being a complete idiot. What was this bloke smoking.

We know comets are mostly vacuum.

Except for that other idiot Patzold,

Quote:

not so unrealistically, the nucleus would be a highly porous stony agglomerate, essentially devoid of volitiles.

But as long as we know that the sublimation of ice causes the jets...

Quote:

The sublimation of not only water ice, but also of super-volatile ice (i.e., CO) is unable to remove dust grains for illumination conditions corresponding to 1.3 AU. Awayoutof this impasse requires revision of the most common model assumption employed by the cometary community

Right, ok

But the neutrals and the ions all leave at the same time and speed after sublimation and upon being ionised by the EUV, to form water vapour,

Except they don’t

Quote:

Thisisinlinewithconclusionsdrawnfromourpreviousnum ericalwork(Vigren&Eriksson2017)and may explain why effective ion speeds,derived from measurements bythe LangmuirProbeandtheMu-tualImpedanceProbe,are markedly higher than the expected neu-tral outflow velocity,evenwithinthediamagneticcavityof67P(Odels tadetal.2018)

Onthe ion-neutral coupling in cometary comae

bloody adobe

[Reality Check]

Originally Posted by Sol88

...

The thousands of insane lies, delusions, insults, etc. since 6 July 2009 from Sol88 about his cult's electric comet and electric Sun dogma.
Sol88 gives us an insane rant from Wal Thornhill about stars.
Sol88 gives us an insane video from Donald Scott: Voyager 2 and our Solar System's Birkeland Current
Yet another insane rant from Sol88. Insane lie about asteroid Bennu. Insane ignorance about plasma sheaths. Etc.
Yet another insane rant from Sol88. Insane lies about posts and posters, about models he is totally ignorant about, that an approximation is an error, that ices are not observed, etc.

Sol88's usual insanity which emphasizes Sol88's insane religious dogma that comets are actual rock (no ices or a demented fantasy of "little ices") blasted from rocky planets by electric discharges between planets including recent times (witnessed by us!) and that these rocks discharge in a massive solar electric field. This insanely tears the rock apart and puts gas and dust into the coma and forms their insanity of jets as electrical discharges !

Sol88's usual insane lies about science, comets, posts and posters

[Reality Check]

Originally Posted by Sol88

...

The thousands of insane lies, delusions, insults, etc. since 6 July 2009 from Sol88 about his cult's electric comet and electric Sun dogma.
Sol88 gives us an insane rant from Wal Thornhill about stars.
Sol88 gives us an insane video from Donald Scott: Voyager 2 and our Solar System's Birkeland Current
Yet another insane rant from Sol88. Insane lie about asteroid Bennu. Insane ignorance about plasma sheaths. Etc.
Yet another insane rant from Sol88. Insane lies about posts and posters, about models he is totally ignorant about, that an approximation is an error, that ices are not observed, etc.

Sol88's usual insanity which emphasizes Sol88's insane religious dogma that comets are actual rock (no ices or a demented fantasy of "little ices") blasted from rocky planets by electric discharges between planets including recent times (witnessed by us!) and that these rocks discharge in a massive solar electric field. This insanely tears the rock apart and puts gas and dust into the coma and forms their insanity of jets as electrical discharges !

Sol88's usual insane lies about science, comets, posts and posters
Sol88's insane lie that he has just found that ices have been detected on comets. He has been demented about there being no ices on comets for many years after the detection was cited by us, e.g. Deep Impact ejecta and surface ices on Tempel 1 in 2005 ! The question is:
Will Sol88's insanity that we have not detected ices on comets pop up again? Or has he finally learned a real fact about comets that his demented cult denies?

[Reality Check]

Originally Posted by Sol88

...

The thousands of insane lies, delusions, insults, etc. since 6 July 2009 from Sol88 about his cult's electric comet and electric Sun dogma.
Sol88 gives us an insane rant from Wal Thornhill about stars.
Sol88 gives us an insane video from Donald Scott: Voyager 2 and our Solar System's Birkeland Current
Yet another insane rant from Sol88. Insane lie about asteroid Bennu. Insane ignorance about plasma sheaths. Etc.
Yet another insane rant from Sol88. Insane lies about posts and posters, about models he is totally ignorant about, that an approximation is an error, that ices are not observed, etc.
Will Sol88's insanity that we have not detected ices on comets pop up again? Or has he finally learned a real fact about comets that his demented cult denies?

Sol88's usual insanity which emphasizes Sol88's insane religious dogma that comets are actual rock (no ices or a demented fantasy of "little ices") blasted from rocky planets by electric discharges between planets including recent times (witnessed by us!) and that these rocks discharge in a massive solar electric field. This insanely tears the rock apart and puts gas and dust into the coma and forms their insanity of jets as electrical discharges !

Sol88's usual insane lies about science, comets, posts and posters
We know that jets are gas and dust not Sol88's insane religious dogma of electrical discharges. The mechanism to create jets is sublimation of ices to gas and gas dragging dust with it.
Sol88's usual insane lie that a quote is about jets !
Sol88's usual insane obsession with cherry picked papers.
Sol88's usual insane lying about those cherry picked papers.
Is near-surface ice the driver of dust activity on 67P/Churyumov-Gerasimenko is a model of outgassing of near-surface surface ices dragging dust with it.

Quote:

Methods: We used a 1D thermophysical numerical model that provides a realistic description of cohesion forces among dust aggregates. Several conditions of solar illumination on the nucleus are investigated for the H2O, CO, and CO2 ices below the dust layer. We examine a wide range of dust grain sizes.
Results: The simulations confirm an increase in temperature and pressure at the ice boundary between the two model layers with respect to exposed pure ice. Furthermore, we show that a non-monotonic behavior of temperature and pressure versus layer thickness is expected at the ice-dust interface for fine aggregates (of sizes ≤30 μm), but not for the larger grains. The ratio of vapor pressure to the physically determined tensile strength for various agglomerate sizes and layer thicknesses provides further evidence that the gas drag is not sufficient to remove dust grains of sizes <1 mm, which is a result of taking cohesion forces among the particles into account.
Conclusions: In the framework of the presented model, which can be considered common in terms of assumptions and physical parameters in the cometary community, the dust removal by a gas drag force is not a plausible physical mechanism. The sublimation of not only water ice, but also of super-volatile ice (I.e., CO) is unable to remove dust grains for illumination conditions corresponding to 1.3 AU. A way out of this impasse requires revision of the most common model assumption employed by the cometary community.

Their model concluded that cohesion forces would prevent the removal dust grains of sizes <1 mm.
Sol88's insanity is that is all dust.
Sol88's insanity is that detection of small grains at 67P cannot be explained. For example, any one with a brain can suspect that large grains (also detected) could break up to form the smaller grains. The model may be wrong - real comets have lower cohesive forces between the particles than used in it.
Sol88's insanity includes that any approximations make a model wrong. But the paper he quotes has a model with approximations, e.g. it is 1D !

[jonesdave116]

Quote:

To simplify...Haser model is wrong.

Quote:

No, it is not wrong. And does not alter the fact that they are detecting neutral water vapour, and that you don't understand the science, and therefore the paper. Deal with that, instead of spamming your idiotic, failed woo.

The Nucleus of Comet 67P/ChuryumovGerasimenko - Part I: The Global View – nucleus mass, mass loss, porosity and implications

Yup using the Haser model, there must be ice everywhere on mostly icy comets. The above paper, whilst poo pooed, is a good indicator that all is not well with the Dirtysnowball.

Or whatever model mainstream now use.

Problem is it’s all hidden.

Another idiotic post, sidestepping the obvious failure of the electric comet woo. They detect water. The amount Patzold (who is likely wrong) calls for, is still waaaaay more than you can explain. In fact, you cannot explain a single millilitre of it, let alone hundreds of thousands to millions of tonnes of it. Deal with that, yes? YOU. CANNOT. EXPLAIN. IT. Clear?

[jonesdave116]

Originally Posted by Sol88

So, congratulations to the mainstream scientists that prove water on comets.

but well simplified for the likes of jonesdave116.

Now they just have to work out how the jets work and we are underway.

Talking about surface ice, how much was able to sublimate at this distance?

Or this is all subsurface ice?

What has any of that crap got to do with your failed woo? Which is the subject of this thread. Got nothing, have you (rhetorical)? No science, no mechanisms, no evidence, and not a bloody clue.

[jonesdave116]

Originally Posted by Sol88

Nobody has claimed that comets are mostly ice for decades. As has been pointed out to you innumerable times. The fact that you keep lying about this is telling. And no rock has ever been detected at a comet.

But somebody, A’Hearn claimed

Sorry, jonesy for A’Hearn being a complete idiot. What was this bloke smoking.

We know comets are mostly vacuum.

Except for that other idiot Patzold,

But as long as we know that the sublimation of ice causes the jets...

Right, ok

But the neutrals and the ions all leave at the same time and speed after sublimation and upon being ionised by the EUV, to form water vapour,

Except they don’t Onthe ion-neutral coupling in cometary comae

bloody adobe

And again for the hard of thinking;

No rock ever detected at a comet. Nobody is claiming that the comet isn't mostly vacuum. What do you think Patzold means by 'porous'? Do you know what porous means?

Quote:

Something that is porous has many small holes, so liquid or air can pass through, especially slowly:

https://dictionary.cambridge.org/dic...english/porous

And what do we think those pores are filled with in the vacuum of space? Honey? You really should give up on this science lark, and concentrate on the basics, such as English, maths and comprehension.

[jonesdave116]

Quote:

But as long as we know that the sublimation of ice causes the jets...

Not read any papers on comets for the past few decades, have you? What are those jets composed of? Volatiles and dust. And ice, on some occasions. That isn't a guess, that is observation.
And what are those jets conspicuously lacking? Electric woo!! And yet you still believe this heap of crap that Thornhill conned you with. Hint; whatever it is, it is not science.

[jonesdave116]

Quote:

For example, any one with a brain can suspect that large grains (also detected) could break up to form the smaller grains.

Which is precisely what Skorov said in an email that I posted here, so that Sol could ignore it.

[jonesdave116]

Quote:

but well simplified for the likes of jonesdave116.

Sorry? I understand the paper perfectly well. It is hardly rocket science. You were the one who thought the neutrals weren't neutral! Lol. Probably due to not having a clue what H₂¹⁶O is!

[Sol88]

Originally Posted by jonesdave116

Another idiotic post, sidestepping the obvious failure of the electric comet woo. They detect water. The amount Patzold (who is likely wrong) calls for, is still waaaaay more than you can explain. In fact, you cannot explain a single millilitre of it, let alone hundreds of thousands to millions of tonnes of it. Deal with that, yes? YOU. CANNOT. EXPLAIN. IT. Clear?

What a joker.

Quote:

Then the Haser model

Thought we had been there and done that! way way over estimated the "ice"

Same as Sunshine, Volwerk et al

and

the real kicker

Quote:

The integrated mass of the dust particles is much bigger than is the mass of the liberated water (dust-to-ice ratio>1).

So your mainstream assumption are completely out. leading to way overestimation of "ice".

as Patzold says

Quote:

It seems that the lost gas mass was overestimated by the instruments.

So,

Quote:

The nucleus is thus a highly porous very dusty body with very little ice.

The RSI does not lie, so I've been informed.

Seems

Quote:

Finally, we would recommend caution, based on these re
sults, when attempting correlative studies (models or other Rosetta datasets such as dust jets) with MIRO derived col umn densities (or production rates), assuming that they orig inate from the location of the MIRO footprint

Three-dimensional analysis of spatial resolution of MIRO/Rosetta measurements at 67P/Churyumov-Gersimenko


You my friend have based your whole shebang on assumptions!

Sorry, let alone hundreds of thousands to millions of tonnes of ice is a complete load of assumptions.

As A'Hearn reckons comets are mostly not ice.

[jonesdave116]

Quote:

What a joker.

Sorry? The only joke is you sidestepping the obvious failure of your unscientific woo. They detect water. Fact. That kills your woo.

Quote:

Thought we had been there and done that! way way over estimated the "ice"

Same as Sunshine, Volwerk et al

Nope. You made false claims about that. They excavated thousands of tonnes of ice at Tempel 1. Fact. That killed your woo. 14 years ago.
And Tusenfem has never been involved in a paper that has anything to do directly with estimating the quantity of ice. Only the plasma processes (which are beyond your comprehension) caused by the outgassing that comes from the various ices.

Quote:

So your mainstream assumption are completely out. leading to way overestimation of "ice".

No they aren't.

Quote:

as Patzold says

What does he say? Read the paper, have you? I'd be amazed if you had. What is his estimation of the mass loss due to gas (on which he is most likely wrong)? How does it tie in with your idiotic, impossible woo? Need a clue? I've quoted it before. How many hundreds of thousands of tonnes does he suggest? I am not expecting an answer, as it would involve you suddenly acquiring maths and comprehension skills that you quite clearly do not possess.

Quote:

The RSI does not lie, so I've been informed.

No, it doesn't. What Patzold has likely messed up, is his estimation of the mass that is returned to the comet from the outgassing. As suggested by other authors. Even so, there is still waaaaay too much ice for you to explain. And you cannot and have not even tried to explain it. You have no model.

Quote:

Sorry, let alone hundreds of thousands to millions of tonnes of ice is a complete load of assumptions.

As A'Hearn reckons comets are mostly not ice.

Wrong. And nobody is saying that there weren't hundreds of thousands of tonnes of ice. Only you, and you don't count, due to having clue zero about any of the relevant science or maths. And nobody has claimed that comets are mostly ice for decades. That is just something that you keep lying about. Due to being a liar.

[Sol88]

Originally Posted by jonesdave116

Sorry? The only joke is you sidestepping the obvious failure of your unscientific woo. They detect water. Fact. That kills your woo.



Nope. You made false claims about that. They excavated thousands of tonnes of ice at Tempel 1. Fact. That killed your woo. 14 years ago.
And Tusenfem has never been involved in a paper that has anything to do directly with estimating the quantity of ice. Only the plasma processes (which are beyond your comprehension) caused by the outgassing that comes from the various ices.



No they aren't.



What does he say? Read the paper, have you? I'd be amazed if you had. What is his estimation of the mass loss due to gas (on which he is most likely wrong)? How does it tie in with your idiotic, impossible woo? Need a clue? I've quoted it before. How many hundreds of thousands of tonnes does he suggest? I am not expecting an answer, as it would involve you suddenly acquiring maths and comprehension skills that you quite clearly do not possess.



No, it doesn't. What Patzold has likely messed up, is his estimation of the mass that is returned to the comet from the outgassing. As suggested by other authors. Even so, there is still waaaaay too much ice for you to explain. And you cannot and have not even tried to explain it. You have no model.



Wrong. And nobody is saying that there weren't hundreds of thousands of tonnes of ice. Only you, and you don't count, due to having clue zero about any of the relevant science or maths. And nobody has claimed that comets are mostly ice for decades. That is just something that you keep lying about. Due to being a liar.

Sound like you don't know how they guesstimate ices!

Patzold, is on the money. His real problem is it makes everyone else look like beginners.

The outgasses a piddley little amount of water released from the hydrated minerals! Same as on Asteroids champ!

[jonesdave116]

Originally Posted by Sol88

Sound like you don't know how they guesstimate ices!

Patzold, is on the money. His real problem is it makes everyone else look like beginners.

The outgasses a piddley little amount of water released from the hydrated minerals! Same as on Asteroids champ!

Hydrated minerals! What a clown! I asked you a question. Answer it. What levels of outgassing is Patzold (who is likely wrong) looking at, and what would this imply for the total mass of lost ice? Get on it, and stop posting scientifically illiterate crap.

[jonesdave116]

Quote:

Same as on Asteroids champ!

Really? Well, Rosetta visited two asteroids on the way to 67P. Perhaps you could tell us what the amount of (non-) detected water was. I'll wait. Whilst you are looking in vain for the answer to that question, you could also do some research into the temperatures required to release water from hydrated minerals. And then go and look at the temperatures recorded at outgassing comets (Tempel 1, Hartley 2 and 67P). And then you will realise why you are posting scientifically impossible crap. All in a pathetic attempt to hang on to a belief in idiotic woo invented by clowns who don't understand Jack about the relevant science, and believe Earth used to orbit Saturn! That is how bloody ridiculous this whole charade is. It is nothing to do with science.

[jonesdave116]

Related to the previous, and in the sure belief that Sol will not be able to provide an answer, here is a little bit on hydrated minerals at asteroids;

Quote:

Hydrated silicates can be used as very sensitive tracers of thermal history (Hiroi et al., 1996). In addition to altering olivine and pyroxene to form hydrated silicates (e.g., serpentine), the aqueous alteration process produces oxidized Fe that has absorption bands in the visible and UV spectral regions. Moderate subsequent heating can alter the depth or eliminate some or all of these bands. Hiroi et al. (1996)finds that Murchison (CM2) material exhibits a strong UV band due to FeO, 0.7-μm band from Fe2+-Fe3+ charge transfer, and 3-μm band due to H2O/OH when heated less than 400°C. Between 400° and 600°C, the 0.7-μm band weakens and disappears, and the 3-μm band gets shallower. At temperatures above 600°C, the 3-μm band disappears as the minerals are completely dehydrated (Fig. 6). Asteroid 511Davida has been observed extensively, and a 3-μm band has been seen with variable depths over at least 25% of the rotation period. However, at a similar sub-Earth latitude, the 0.7-μm band was not seen at any rotation phase. A mild heating episode, occurring after the aqueous alteration, with temperatures reaching 400°–600°C, can explain these observations.

My bolding. From;

Hydrated Minerals on Asteroids: The Astronomical Record
Rivkin, A. S. et al (2002)
https://www.lpi.usra.edu/books/Aster...pdf?q=hydrated

Now, I wonder what the measured temperatures were at the above mentioned comets? Well, not even 400 K, let alone 400 C!

[Sol88]

Originally Posted by jonesdave116

Hydrated minerals! What a clown! I asked you a question. Answer it. What levels of outgassing is Patzold (who is likely wrong) looking at, and what would this imply for the total mass of lost ice? Get on it, and stop posting scientifically illiterate crap.

Likely wrong?

‘Spose him and his team are unlikely to be wrong?

How’s that fit into the dirtysnowball if true?

Brace yourselves, here comes a large page count from reality check and a dummy spit from jonesy

Who is still struggling with the concept of electrodynamics and dusty kinetic plasmas.

Ice not needed or observed in the quantities needed.

[Sol88]

Originally Posted by jonesdave116

Related to the previous, and in the sure belief that Sol will not be able to provide an answer, here is a little bit on hydrated minerals at asteroids;



My bolding. From;

Hydrated Minerals on Asteroids: The Astronomical Record
Rivkin, A. S. et al (2002)
https://www.lpi.usra.edu/books/Aster...pdf?q=hydrated

Now, I wonder what the measured temperatures were at the above mentioned comets? Well, not even 400 K, let alone 400 C!

And the resolution on the instrument that measured surface temperature is?

These things, according to Stardust a sample return mission from comet Wild 2, found FLASH heated not BAKED refractory minerals.

Like the comet was made from this stuff??

[Belz...]

Seems like Sol cannot even answer the most basic of questions about his claims or the evidence he purports exists.

That's not a good sign.

[steenkh]

Originally Posted by Sol88

Likely wrong?

‘Spose him and his team are unlikely to be wrong?

How’s that fit into the dirtysnowball if true?

Whatever failings the dirtysnowball may have, has no bearing on your ELECTRIC COMET. In fact, it seems that your ELECTRIC COMET is also incompatible with Pätzold.

Quote:

Brace yourselves, here comes a large page count from reality check and a dummy spit from jonesy

Who is still struggling with the concept of electrodynamics and dusty kinetic plasmas.

Ice not needed or observed in the quantities needed.

Is that an answer to "What levels of outgassing is Patzold [...] looking at, and what would this imply for the total mass of lost ice?"

[jonesdave116]

Originally Posted by Sol88

Likely wrong?

‘Spose him and his team are unlikely to be wrong?

How’s that fit into the dirtysnowball if true?

Brace yourselves, here comes a large page count from reality check and a dummy spit from jonesy

Who is still struggling with the concept of electrodynamics and dusty kinetic plasmas.

Ice not needed or observed in the quantities needed.

Point 1: I know nowhere near as much about plasma physics as Tusenfem. Obviously. However, I know far more about it than you or the idiot Thornhill.

Point 2: You have run away again, haven't you? Go read the Patzold paper, and tell us what figures he is suggesting for the ice mass loss. Need me to do it for you? I think we all know why you won't answer that. It is quite plain in the paper. Go find it, and stop chickening out. Any ice kills your woo, and there are hundreds of thousands to millions of tonnes of it. Just as your woo was killed back in 2005 by the impact at Tempel 1.

[jonesdave116]

Originally Posted by Sol88

And the resolution on the instrument that measured surface temperature is?

These things, according to Stardust a sample return mission from comet Wild 2, found FLASH heated not BAKED refractory minerals.

Like the comet was made from this stuff??

Little hint for the hard of thinking - the high temperature material must have originated in the inner solar system. From there, it is blown outwards by the activity of the young Sun. As I believe we have observed (not the material, but the activity that would send it into the far reaches). And the instruments certainly don't have error bars of > 300 K! That would be a bit useless, and not worth putting on the spacecraft! It was ~ 5 K at Tempel 1 and Hartley 2.

The temperature, thermal inertia, roughness and color of the nuclei of Comets 103P/Hartley 2 and 9P/Tempel 1
Groussin, O. et al. (2013)
https://www.sciencedirect.com/scienc...19103512004095

[Sol88]

Originally Posted by jonesdave116

Little hint for the hard of thinking - the high temperature material must have originated in the inner solar system. From there, it is blown outwards by the activity of the young Sun. As I believe we have observed (not the material, but the activity that would send it into the far reaches). And the instruments certainly don't have error bars of > 300 K! That would be a bit useless, and not worth putting on the spacecraft! It was ~ 5 K at Tempel 1 and Hartley 2.

The temperature, thermal inertia, roughness and color of the nuclei of Comets 103P/Hartley 2 and 9P/Tempel 1
Groussin, O. et al. (2013)
https://www.sciencedirect.com/scienc...19103512004095

Well Mr plasma expert, it is blown outwards by the activity of the young Sun. Blown? As if blowing in the wind?

Must have? According to the Dirtysnowball model?

[Reality Check]

Originally Posted by Sol88

...

The thousands of insane lies, delusions, insults, etc. since 6 July 2009 from Sol88 about his cult's electric comet and electric Sun dogma.
Sol88 gives us an insane rant from Wal Thornhill about stars.
Sol88 gives us an insane video from Donald Scott: Voyager 2 and our Solar System's Birkeland Current
Yet another insane rant from Sol88. Insane lie about asteroid Bennu. Insane ignorance about plasma sheaths. Etc.
Yet another insane rant from Sol88. Insane lies about posts and posters, about models he is totally ignorant about, that an approximation is an error, that ices are not observed, etc.
Will Sol88's insanity that we have not detected ices on comets pop up again? Or has he finally learned a real fact about comets that his demented cult denies?

Sol88's usual insanity which emphasizes Sol88's insane religious dogma that comets are actual rock (no ices or a demented fantasy of "little ices") blasted from rocky planets by electric discharges between planets including recent times (witnessed by us!) and that these rocks discharge in a massive solar electric field. This insanely tears the rock apart and puts gas and dust into the coma and forms their insanity of jets as electrical discharges !

Sol88's usual insane lies about science, comets, posts and posters

[Sol88]

Originally Posted by jonesdave116

Point 1: I know nowhere near as much about plasma physics as Tusenfem. Obviously. However, I know far more about it than you or the idiot Thornhill.

Point 2: You have run away again, haven't you? Go read the Patzold paper, and tell us what figures he is suggesting for the ice mass loss. Need me to do it for you? I think we all know why you won't answer that. It is quite plain in the paper. Go find it, and stop chickening out. Any ice kills your woo, and there are hundreds of thousands to millions of tonnes of it. Just as your woo was killed back in 2005 by the impact at Tempel 1.

Ok, hang let me look again...

Quote:

When gravity is neglected and a constant outflow velocity is assumed, the total flux of non collisional water vapor in a comet will be constant through any spherical shell around the nucleus at distance r This is called the Haser model(Haser1957),and is described below. The number density of watervapor,n, as a function of the distance,r, from the comet nucleusis

Energy conversion in cometary atmospheres and that’s the HASER model...this give jonesdave116 his billions of tonnes of ice from Tempel 1 along with a way out estimation for dust to gas ratio.



So Patzold, says for the porousity guestimate of 80%...

Quote:

(ii) upper porosity bound: if ice = 0, then Fnucleus = ∞ and dust (1-poro)-bulk = 0 in (11) and, not so unrealistically, the nucleus would be a highly porous stony agglomerate, essentially devoid of volitiles.

Quote:

For very high Fnucleus values, the nucleus is highly porous and dusty with very little ice (e.g. for Fnucleus = 7, the ice content is about 7% for porosities between 68% and 80%, respectively). A variation in porosity by 1% beyond the 70% implies a steep increase in Fnucleus, leaving only a tiny fractional ice content. As a reminder, the upper bound on the porosity is 73% to 85% for a highly porous stony body without ice for the selected dust material density range.

So a rocky body with no ice?

Quote:

envisioned cometary nuclei as mostly ice, although our understanding has been evolving more toward mostly rock,

A’Hearn