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.
Reply
Old 2nd February 2021, 06:38 PM   #1201
Sol88
Philosopher
 
Sol88's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 6,435
Originally Posted by jonesdave116 View Post
Appears online in 2011 in a journal that appears to have closed in 2007! It has a received date, but no acceptance date. Journal doesn't seem to have an impact factor. 'Paper' has 8 citations. Of which 5 are self-citations, two are indecipherable, due to being in Chinese, and one is about Hartley 2, and has no relevance to the silly claims made in that 'paper'.
Attempts to download it via sci-hub, from the doi number, result in a 404 not found page. It only exists on arxiv. Having read as much as I could stand, it is complete bollocks, and doesn't even read like a scientific paper, notwithstanding the authors writing in what is not their native language.

In short, it is total nonsense. Just saying.
Well, they did use Excavating comet Tempel 1. Science 310, 258-264. A’Hearn, M.F

Same A'Hearn said comets are rocks!

Quote:
(c) What are comets made of?

At the simplest level, a very basic question is whether comets are mostly ice or mostly rock/dirt/refractory material. Whipple’s [2] model of the dirty snowball, the first quantitative model, envisioned cometary nuclei as mostly ice, although our understanding has been evolving more toward mostly rock, particularly for 67P/C-G for which refractory/volatile ratios as high as 6 have been cited [3,4].
Comets: looking ahead Michael F. A’Hearn


In short independent of the ELECTRIC COMET mob, they came up with the same conclusion.

Comets are bits of planets!
__________________
“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 Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 2nd February 2021, 07:58 PM   #1202
Reality Check
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: New Zealand
Posts: 27,720
Exclamation Sol88 persists in idiotic insults and lies about A'Hearn

  1. Sol88 persists in idiotic insults and lies about A'Hearn who wrote hundreds of mainstream ice and and dust comet papers.
    A'Hearn was not the a follower of a deluded cult. A'Hearn knew and astronomers know the physical evidence that comets are made of a large % (at least 17% for comet 67P) of ice.
  2. Sol88 persists in an insane quote from A'Hearn's review when that quote states that comet 67P is at least 1/6 volatiles (ice) !
  3. Sol88 lies about the "paper" he cites which is not Sol88's deluded dogma of comets being blasted from rocky planets by magical electrical discharges.
    Anyone who can read sees that the speculation in the "paper" is chemical explosions on icy moons creating short period comets.

Last edited by Reality Check; 2nd February 2021 at 08:09 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 Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 2nd February 2021, 08:00 PM   #1203
Reality Check
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: New Zealand
Posts: 27,720
Exclamation The usual abysmal level of lies, delusions, insults, etc. addressed since 6 July 2009

The thousands of lies, delusions, insults, etc. since 6 July 2009 from Sol88 about his cult's electric comet and electric Sun dogma.
The abysmal insults of the deceased Michael Francis A'Hearn and all astronomers by Sol88 linking them with Sol88's dogma, etc. (no astronomer believes comets are actual rock)
1155 + 819 826 items of lies, insults, etc. from Sol88 since ~10 March 2020

Sol88's deluded dogma did not affect OSIRIS-REx when it touched their imaginary massively charged active asteroid Bennu!
Sol88 constantly lies with "Comets are charged rocky bodies discharging in the solar plasma"
Sol88 constantly lies that sublimation does not happen on comets when the observed ice Sol88 has cited has to sublimate
Sol88 trusts the blatantly lying and deluded Wal Thornhill yet again!
Sol88 often lies about his cult's delusions that Sol88 believes in
Sol88 constantly lies that he is supporting/modeling his deluded dogma with mainstream science.
Sol88 constantly lies that MWD is invalid, e.g. "MHD IS A BUST.", when it is working physics !
Sol88 constantly lies that every paper on comets has to mention charged dust.
Sol88 constantly lies with "dust is charged and being removed via electric forces".
Sol88 lies about the Big Bang, black holes, etc. yet again !
Sol88 lies about his cult and their deluded dogma which is based on Worlds in Collision and Velikovsky's other fantasies held to support his religious beliefs.
Sol88 and the Thunderbolts cult refusal to "Look thru the telescope"
More about Sol88's cult, Sol88's lies, Sol88 emphasizing his cult's idiocy and Thornhill's delusions about physics.
How Sol88 and Wal Thornhill make the electric comet deluded with EDM, Part II
Why Sol88's cult having comet tails as electric discharges is deluded
Sol88 constantly lies by repeating his already answered and irrelevant questions about mainstream physics

Last edited by Reality Check; 2nd February 2021 at 08:07 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 Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 2nd February 2021, 11:20 PM   #1205
jonesdave116
Illuminator
 
jonesdave116's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Posts: 4,980
Originally Posted by Sol88 View Post
Well, they did use Excavating comet Tempel 1. Science 310, 258-264. A’Hearn, M.F

Same A'Hearn said comets are rocks!

Comets: looking ahead Michael F. A’Hearn


In short independent of the ELECTRIC COMET mob, they came up with the same conclusion.

Comets are bits of planets!
Nope, no rock at comets, and nobody is saying that they come from planets. Nobody sane, anyways. And certainly not A'Hearn. So, that would be another lie.
__________________
“There is in every village a torch - the teacher; and an extinguisher - the priest.” - Victor Hugo

“Never argue with an idiot. They will only bring you down to their level and beat you with experience.” - George Carlin
jonesdave116 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 3rd February 2021, 06:02 PM   #1206
Sol88
Philosopher
 
Sol88's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 6,435
So ya say, jd116, so ya say.

On the other hand A'Hearn says
Quote:
although our understanding has been evolving more toward mostly rock
.

Are you saying A'Hearn is wrong?
__________________
“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; 3rd February 2021 at 06:48 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 Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 3rd February 2021, 09:09 PM   #1207
jonesdave116
Illuminator
 
jonesdave116's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Posts: 4,980
Originally Posted by Sol88 View Post
So ya say, jd116, so ya say.

On the other hand A'Hearn says .

Are you saying A'Hearn is wrong?
No, because he wasn't stupid enough to mean granite, basalt, sandstone or the like. He meant dust. As the references to back his comment up show. There is no rock at comets. Never seen. Not even close.
__________________
“There is in every village a torch - the teacher; and an extinguisher - the priest.” - Victor Hugo

“Never argue with an idiot. They will only bring you down to their level and beat you with experience.” - George Carlin
jonesdave116 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 3rd February 2021, 10:43 PM   #1208
Reality Check
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: New Zealand
Posts: 27,720
Exclamation Sol88 persists in idiotic insults and lies about A'Hearn

  1. Sol88 persists in idiotic insults and lies about A'Hearn who wrote hundreds of mainstream ice and and dust comet papers.
    A'Hearn was not the a follower of a deluded cult. A'Hearn knew and astronomers know the physical evidence that comets are made of a large % (at least 17% for comet 67P) of ice.
  2. Sol88 persists in an insane quote from A'Hearn's review when that quote states that comet 67P is at least 1/6 volatiles (ice) !
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 Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 4th February 2021, 07:21 PM   #1209
Reality Check
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: New Zealand
Posts: 27,720
The Uncensored Guide To ‘Oumuamua, Aliens, And That Harvard Astronomer
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 Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 6th February 2021, 11:28 AM   #1210
Gord_in_Toronto
Penultimate Amazing
 
Gord_in_Toronto's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 20,439
Originally Posted by Reality Check View Post
The number of known rocks in the Universe s measured in Trillions (WAG). The number of known industrial civilizations is one. My calculator does not have a sufficient number of digits to calculate the odds but the result appears close to zero.
__________________
"Reality is what's left when you cease to believe." Philip K. Dick
Gord_in_Toronto is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 11th February 2021, 05:34 PM   #1211
Sol88
Philosopher
 
Sol88's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 6,435
Originally Posted by Reality Check View Post
Ahhh, the mainstream...
__________________
“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 Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 11th February 2021, 05:41 PM   #1212
Sol88
Philosopher
 
Sol88's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 6,435
Meanwhile...

Ceramic chips inside meteorites hint at wild days of the early solar system

Quote:
The prevailing view was that the sun had cooled gently and steadily, and objects such as the ceramic chips were formed out of solar gas that had quietly condensed.

But some other recent findings have caused scientists to question this view, and new technology means we are now capable of much more rigorous studies.

"The results indicated that temperatures these ceramic inclusions encountered as they formed would have been over 1,600 Kelvin—or about 2,400 degrees Fahrenheit—over tens to hundreds of years."

This picture indicates a young star that was flaring and fluctuating over a long time period, affecting everything around it.
1,600 Kelvin? Hot like an ARC? A stella flare?
Quote:
Cause
Flares occur when accelerated charged particles, mainly electrons, interact with the plasma medium.
Like an electric current?
__________________
“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 Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 11th February 2021, 05:45 PM   #1213
Sol88
Philosopher
 
Sol88's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 6,435
A new way of forming planets

Quote:
Two contrasting forces...


Quote:
gravitational instabilities

"But over shorter distances—the scale of single planets—another force dominates: That of magnetic fields developing alongside the planets," Mayer elaborates. These magnetic fields stir up the gas and dust of the disk and thus influence the formation of the planets.
gas and dust?

See above....
Quote:
Cause
Flares occur when accelerated charged particles, mainly electrons, interact with the plasma medium.
So ELECTRIC CURRENT, again.

Too good.
__________________
“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 Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 11th February 2021, 09:06 PM   #1214
Reality Check
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: New Zealand
Posts: 27,720
  1. Sol88 stupidly cites a mainstream paper irrelevant to his deluded comets are rock, etc. dogma.
    Ceramic chips inside meteorites hint at wild days of the early solar system
  2. Sol88's citation of this paper is also stupid because this analysis of carbonaceous chondrite meteorites did not find any terrestrial material!
  3. Sol88 inanely highlights phrases in a quote from a mainstream paper.
  4. Sol88 lies with "Hot like an ARC" when that is not what the paper says..
  5. Sol88 lies with "A stella flare?" when he highlighted that the evidence supports "young star that was flaring and fluctuating".
  6. Sol88 lies with "Like an electric current?"
  7. Sol88 stupidly cites a mainstream paper irrelevant to his deluded comets are rock, etc. dogma.
    A new way of forming planets
  8. Sol88 lies with "" about "Two contrasting forces..." when the 2 contrasting forces are then listed - gravitational instabilities and magnetic fields !
  9. Sol88 lies with "gas and dust?" when he has cited an paper about planets forming from gas and dust.
    And another paper about the formation of that dust!

Last edited by Reality Check; 11th February 2021 at 09:11 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 Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 11th February 2021, 09:07 PM   #1215
Reality Check
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: New Zealand
Posts: 27,720
Exclamation The usual abysmal level of lies, delusions, insults, etc. addressed since 6 July 200

The thousands of lies, delusions, insults, etc. since 6 July 2009 from Sol88 about his cult's electric comet and electric Sun dogma.
The abysmal insults of the deceased Michael Francis A'Hearn and all astronomers by Sol88 linking them with Sol88's dogma, etc. (no astronomer believes comets are actual rock)
1155 + 826 835 items of lies, insults, etc. from Sol88 since ~10 March 2020

Sol88's deluded dogma did not affect OSIRIS-REx when it touched their imaginary massively charged active asteroid Bennu!
Sol88 constantly lies with "Comets are charged rocky bodies discharging in the solar plasma"
Sol88 constantly lies that sublimation does not happen on comets when the observed ice Sol88 has cited has to sublimate
Sol88 trusts the blatantly lying and deluded Wal Thornhill yet again!
Sol88 often lies about his cult's delusions that Sol88 believes in
Sol88 constantly lies that he is supporting/modeling his deluded dogma with mainstream science.
Sol88 constantly lies that MWD is invalid, e.g. "MHD IS A BUST.", when it is working physics !
Sol88 constantly lies that every paper on comets has to mention charged dust.
Sol88 constantly lies with "dust is charged and being removed via electric forces".
Sol88 lies about the Big Bang, black holes, etc. yet again !
Sol88 lies about his cult and their deluded dogma which is based on Worlds in Collision and Velikovsky's other fantasies held to support his religious beliefs.
Sol88 and the Thunderbolts cult refusal to "Look thru the telescope"
More about Sol88's cult, Sol88's lies, Sol88 emphasizing his cult's idiocy and Thornhill's delusions about physics.
How Sol88 and Wal Thornhill make the electric comet deluded with EDM, Part II
Why Sol88's cult having comet tails as electric discharges is deluded
Sol88 constantly lies by repeating his already answered and irrelevant questions about mainstream physics

Last edited by Reality Check; 11th February 2021 at 09:12 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 Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 12th February 2021, 12:18 PM   #1217
tusenfem
Master Poster
 
tusenfem's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 2,920
Originally Posted by Sol88 View Post
1,600 Kelvin? Hot like an ARC? A stella flare?


STELLAAAAAAAAA!!!!!
__________________
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 Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 4th March 2021, 06:59 PM   #1218
Sol88
Philosopher
 
Sol88's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 6,435
Ion bulk speeds and temperatures in the diamagnetic cavity of comet67P from RPC-ICA measurements

Quote:
indicates that the coupling between ions and neutrals is not strong enough to keep the ions at the same speed as the neutrals at the location of the spacecraft.
Mmmmm... diamagnetic cavity.

It is the electric field is holding the solar wind back not fictious "outgassing" from fictious "sublimation".

tusenfem, what is accelerating the charged particles, including the charged dust off the nucleus?

Side note

Hope the rona has not affected your way of life too much. I do feel for our European cousins.

Has it put the brakes on your research?
__________________
“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 Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 4th March 2021, 08:45 PM   #1219
Reality Check
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: New Zealand
Posts: 27,720
Exclamation Sol88's continued idiocy about mainstream cometary papers

Originally Posted by Sol88 View Post
  1. Sol88's continued idiocy about mainstream cometary papers as expected from a gullible supporter of a cult with obviously deluded dogma.
  2. Sol88's continued idiocy of questions about mainstream science that is not his cult's deluded dogma.
To illustrate how idiotic the question from Sol88 is, consider that Sol88 started this thread 11 years ago and still shows abysmal ignorant about comets and physics . We have the solar wind (a plasma) interacting with the comet coma (a plasma). There is turbulence. There will be changing electromagnetic fields. Changing electromagnetic fields accelerate charges such as electrons - duh!

The thousands of lies, delusions, insults, etc. since 6 July 2009 from Sol88 about his cult's electric comet and electric Sun dogma.
The abysmal insults of the deceased Michael Francis A'Hearn and all astronomers by Sol88 linking them with Sol88's dogma, etc. (no astronomer believes comets are actual rock)
1155 + 835 837 items of lies, insults, etc. from Sol88 since ~10 March 2020

Sol88's deluded dogma did not affect OSIRIS-REx when it touched their imaginary massively charged active asteroid Bennu!
Sol88 constantly lies with "Comets are charged rocky bodies discharging in the solar plasma"
Sol88 constantly lies that sublimation does not happen on comets when the observed ice Sol88 has cited has to sublimate
Sol88 trusts the blatantly lying and deluded Wal Thornhill yet again!
Sol88 often lies about his cult's delusions that Sol88 believes in
Sol88 constantly lies that he is supporting/modeling his deluded dogma with mainstream science.
Sol88 constantly lies that MWD is invalid, e.g. "MHD IS A BUST.", when it is working physics !
Sol88 constantly lies that every paper on comets has to mention charged dust.
Sol88 constantly lies with "dust is charged and being removed via electric forces".
Sol88 lies about the Big Bang, black holes, etc. yet again !
Sol88 lies about his cult and their deluded dogma which is based on Worlds in Collision and Velikovsky's other fantasies held to support his religious beliefs.
Sol88 and the Thunderbolts cult refusal to "Look thru the telescope"
More about Sol88's cult, Sol88's lies, Sol88 emphasizing his cult's idiocy and Thornhill's delusions about physics.
How Sol88 and Wal Thornhill make the electric comet deluded with EDM, Part II
Why Sol88's cult having comet tails as electric discharges is deluded
Sol88 constantly lies by repeating his already answered and irrelevant questions about mainstream physics

Last edited by Reality Check; 4th March 2021 at 08:54 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 Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 4th March 2021, 08:46 PM   #1220
Reality Check
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: New Zealand
Posts: 27,720
Question What is the charge difference between Bennu and 67P

4 November 2020 Sol88: What is the charge difference between the massively charged active asteroid Bennu and the massively charged active comet 67P (N.B. your deluded dogma has massive thunderbolts tearing rock apart into gas and dust)?
15 December 2020 Sol88: How does your Thunderbolts cult explain that the Earth is immune to their "physics"?
15 December 2020 Sol88: How does your Thunderbolts cult explain the lack of minerals unique to rocky planets in the Stardust samples?
15 December 2020 Sol88: How is your Thunderbolts cult going to explain a lack of minerals unique to rocky planets in the Hayabusa2 samples?
18 December 2020 Sol88: How does your Thunderbolts cult explain the lack of uniquely terrestrial minerals in meteorites?
11 January 2021 Sol88: How does your Thunderbolts cult explain the asteroid belt and moon systems seemingly being immune to their deluded dogma?
22 January 2021 Sol88: How do you explain the lack of uniquely terrestrial minerals in the Flensburg meteorite as your deluded cult demands?

These are questions about the actual subject of this thread !
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 Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 4th March 2021, 08:52 PM   #1221
Little 10 Toes
Master Poster
 
Little 10 Toes's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 2,322
Originally Posted by Sol88 View Post
Well, they did use Excavating comet Tempel 1. Science 310, 258-264. A’Hearn, M.F

Same A'Hearn said comets are rocks!

Comets: looking ahead Michael F. A’Hearn


In short independent of the ELECTRIC COMET mob, they came up with the same conclusion.

Comets are bits of planets!
No. Comets are bits of the moon.
Little 10 Toes is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old Yesterday, 12:27 AM   #1222
tusenfem
Master Poster
 
tusenfem's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 2,920
Originally Posted by Sol88 View Post
It is the electric field is holding the solar wind back not fictious "outgassing" from fictious "sublimation".
If you say so

Originally Posted by Sol88 View Post
tusenfem, what is accelerating the charged particles, including the charged dust off the nucleus?
Well, you might read the paper

Inside the diamagnetic cavity, ion motion is determined by the interplay of electrodynamic and collisional interactions. An ambipolar electric field, arising from the charge separation resulting from the new born electrons moving faster than the new born ions, accelerates the ions radially outward (e.g.
Berčič et al. 2018; Odelstad et al. 2018). At the same time, ionneutral collisions inhibit the acceleration .

Originally Posted by Sol88 View Post
Has it put the brakes on your research?
Why should it?
First author on papers on Ganymede and the Bepi and SolO flybys of Venus.
Co-author on review paper on the plasma environment of 67P and on a chapter for the upcoming Comets III book.
Co-author on papers on the Hermian plasma environment.
__________________
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 Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old Yesterday, 08:31 PM   #1223
jonesdave116
Illuminator
 
jonesdave116's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Posts: 4,980
Originally Posted by Sol88 View Post
Mmmmm... diamagnetic cavity.
Yep, as predicted, and as observed. At Halley in 1986, 67P in 2015, and in the AMPTE experiments in 1984-5. Shame it took the non-scientist mythologists of EU 30 years to realise that it actually existed, and therefore ruled out their impossible woo long before they had even invented it! Due to them not actually having anybody that knows the first thing about either comets or plasma physics.

Quote:
It is the electric field is holding the solar wind back not fictious "outgassing" from fictious "sublimation".
How would an electric field do that? What is creating the electric field? And last time I checked, the ambipolar field was only being invoked close to the nucleus at large heliocentric distances. That is, at very low outgassing rates. At a time when the solar wind is not being held back, merely deflected. And the magnetic field is not being stopped at all.

And sublimation is observed. Get over it.

And the word you are failing to spell correctly is 'fictitious'.


Quote:
tusenfem, what is accelerating the charged particles, including the charged dust off the nucleus?
Nothing is accelerating dust off the nucleus other than gas drag. Once it gets into the coma is a different matter, and will depend on the size of the dust and whether it is charged or not. And to which sign.
And, as has already been explained, an ambipolar field accelerates the ions, and retards the electrons, to maintain quasi-neutrality. The ions and electrons come from neutral species, which make up roughly 999 999 parts in 1 000 000 of the species in the near nucleus coma. Which come from outgassed material, mostly H2O. For which you have no explanation.
You used to have a scientifically impossible explanation, but that bit the big one once it was pointed out that the solar wind could not be creating it for a number of reasons, including the observation of a diamagnetic cavity, which showed that the solar wind was getting nowhere near the nucleus to perform the unscientific miracles that the idiot Thornhill ascribed to it. Which takes us back to the beginning of this post.
__________________
“There is in every village a torch - the teacher; and an extinguisher - the priest.” - Victor Hugo

“Never argue with an idiot. They will only bring you down to their level and beat you with experience.” - George Carlin
jonesdave116 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old Today, 01:10 AM   #1224
Sol88
Philosopher
 
Sol88's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 6,435
Poor jd116,

Comet Catalina suggests comets delivered carbon to rocky planets


Where is the water?

__________________
“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 Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old Today, 08:03 PM   #1225
jonesdave116
Illuminator
 
jonesdave116's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Posts: 4,980
Originally Posted by Sol88 View Post
Poor jd116,

Comet Catalina suggests comets delivered carbon to rocky planets


Where is the water?

Water? They were bathing in it around 67P for over two years. Or did you miss that? Or the water around Halley? And Hartley 2 in the form of ice? And Tempel 1? In fact, any instrument capable of detecting water that has looked at a comet, has detected water!

However, long before we had ever definitively detected it at a comet, from the Kuiper Airborne Observatory observations of Halley in 1985, everybody knew it had to be there. Due to us being able to see the expected breakdown products of water. Such as OH and H. Even Alfven acknowledged that. And given that water ice is going to be far more abundant in a proto-solar system than any other ice, then it simply had to be there, given that we had detected gases from other ices, so knew that the conditions also favoured the incorporation of water ice.

The only people who don't think there is water ice in comets appear to be a couple of Velikovskian nutjobs, with zero knowledge nor understanding of any relevant science. That is why you'll find that when thousands of tonnes of the stuff was blasted out of Tempel 1, they simply ignored it, on the basis that their gullible followers would be extremely unlikely to find the papers describing the detections. Ditto with the 'snowstorm' around Hartley 2. They took a bigger risk with their gullible followers on that one, as the observation made it into press releases, as well as papers, and included their favourite type of scientific 'evidence' - pictures! That would have been difficult to explain away to those brainwashed followers, so they simply ignored it, and hoped none of them would notice. Seems like none of them did. That is why, when I rocked up at the ESA Rosetta Blog, in 2015, there were a handful of deluded wooists exclaiming such things as, "where is the ice?" It appeared to come as a surprise to them that we had long since seen it.

Which goes back to my previous comment - they didn't know about it because the clowns they rely on for information on these things didn't tell them. So, when they come out with idiotic claims of the solar wind creating water, they are also surprised by the fact that we knew the solar wind was getting nowhere near where the water had been detected. And we had known that since 1986.
It is also why they wittered on about electrical flashes at Tempel 1, that we knew did not happen from observations of the very wavelengths that Thornhill said they would be seen in, if only we would look! We did. They weren't there.

And so it goes on. A whole tribe of scientifically ignorant followers of Velikovskian morons, were deluded into believing scientifically impossible gibberish and lies for years, due to not knowing about the existence of Google Scholar and ADS! How dumb would people have to be to fall for such a thing?
(That last was rhetorical, by the way, but don't let it put you off attempting an answer!)
__________________
“There is in every village a torch - the teacher; and an extinguisher - the priest.” - Victor Hugo

“Never argue with an idiot. They will only bring you down to their level and beat you with experience.” - George Carlin

Last edited by jonesdave116; Today at 08:04 PM.
jonesdave116 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old Today, 08:22 PM   #1226
jonesdave116
Illuminator
 
jonesdave116's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Posts: 4,980
Originally Posted by Sol88 View Post
Poor jd116,

Comet Catalina suggests comets delivered carbon to rocky planets


Where is the water?

You've already been linked to the observations of ice at that comet previously;

Icy Grains from the Nucleus of Comet C/2013 US10 (Catalina)
Protopapa, S. et al. (2018)
https://iopscience.iop.org/article/1...13/aad33b/meta

Quote:
We present Infrared Telescope Facility/SpeX and NEOWISE observations of the dynamically new comet C/2013 US10 (Catalina), hereafter US10, from 5.8 au inbound, to near perihelion at 1.3 au, and back to 5.0 au outbound. We detect water ice in the coma of US10, assess and monitor the physical properties of the ice as insolation varies with heliocentric distance, and investigate the relationship between water ice and CO2............. We report (1) nearly identical near-infrared spectroscopic measurements of the coma at −5.8 au, −5.0 au, +3.9 au (where <0 au indicates pre-perihelion epochs), all presenting evidence of water-ice grains,..
__________________
“There is in every village a torch - the teacher; and an extinguisher - the priest.” - Victor Hugo

“Never argue with an idiot. They will only bring you down to their level and beat you with experience.” - George Carlin
jonesdave116 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Reply

International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » Science, Mathematics, Medicine, and Technology

Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 11:31 PM.
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.