Asteroid 2003 EH

Plasma and electricity in space. Failure of gravity-only cosmology. Exposing the myths of dark matter, dark energy, black holes, neutron stars, and other mathematical constructs. The electric model of stars. Predictions and confirmations of the electric comet.

Moderators: MGmirkin, bboyer

mnemeth1
Posts: 43
Joined: Tue Jul 01, 2008 1:03 am
Contact:

Re: Asteroid 2003 EH

Unread post by mnemeth1 » Thu Mar 05, 2009 12:09 pm

MGmirkin wrote:
mnemeth1 wrote:Holmes is almost double the size of EH1.

EH1 does display some cometary properties as well so its not totally dead.

Holmes also for the most part remains dead.
Umm, when we say bigger, do we mean the nucleus or the coma? Just wondering...

Regards,
~Michael Gmirkin
I'm just talking about the nucleus.

Of course its entirely possible I'm wrong, I'm just throwing out some ideas I think might make logical sense.

I would think that nucleus size plays a role in the absorbtion of charge and the rate of charge equalization.

User avatar
webolife
Posts: 2539
Joined: Mon Mar 17, 2008 2:01 pm
Location: Seattle

Re: Asteroid 2003 EH

Unread post by webolife » Thu Mar 05, 2009 2:12 pm

I would generally agree with your "size matters" approach if you are talking about, say, surface area of the nucleus.
I mightn't be so agreeable if you are basing cometary discharge prominence on mass.
Truth extends beyond the border of self-limiting science. Free discourse among opposing viewpoints draws the open-minded away from the darkness of inevitable bias and nearer to the light of universal reality.

mnemeth1
Posts: 43
Joined: Tue Jul 01, 2008 1:03 am
Contact:

Re: Asteroid 2003 EH

Unread post by mnemeth1 » Thu Mar 05, 2009 3:39 pm

webolife wrote:I would generally agree with your "size matters" approach if you are talking about, say, surface area of the nucleus.
I mightn't be so agreeable if you are basing cometary discharge prominence on mass.
I'm talking about the size of the nucleus as it pretains to the rate it aquires the surrounding charge, the time it holds that charge, and the rate of charge equalization to the surrounding space plasma.

I have no idea if I'm right, just thinking out loud.

Since comet outbursts are a function of charge equalization, and a smaller object can equalize itself more rapidly than a larger object, smaller objects might not be prone to the breakdown of the surrounding double layer causing an outburst. If an object can rapidly equalize its charge to the surrounding plasma, its double layer wouldn't necessiarly overload and discharge.

michael.suede
Posts: 88
Joined: Fri Mar 06, 2009 9:27 am

Re: Asteroid 2003 EH

Unread post by michael.suede » Tue Mar 10, 2009 11:05 pm

Here's something interesting to think about.

If comets are a product of charge equalization and the larger the body, the more likely it is to have an explosive discharge, I wonder how a planet in a cometary orbit might look.

I know the saturnian cosmology espouses this view.

But if it happened in our solar system once, I would expect that as our telescopes get better and better, that we would see a cometary planet in orbit around another star some day.

User avatar
nick c
Site Admin
Posts: 2483
Joined: Sun Mar 16, 2008 8:12 pm
Location: connecticut

Re: Asteroid 2003 EH

Unread post by nick c » Wed Mar 11, 2009 10:54 am

It would seem that Asteroid 2003 EH is not undergoing great electrical stress, thus its' classification as an asteroid. Whether this is because discharging is to small to detect, or of its' orbital configuration, small size, composition (ability to equalize charge), or all of the above remains to be seen.
Certainly the distinction between comets and asteroids is a fuzzy one:
[url2=http://www.thunderbolts.info/tpod/2006/ ... teroid.htm]When Asteroids Become Comets[/url2]

michael.suede wrote:Here's something interesting to think about.

If comets are a product of charge equalization and the larger the body, the more likely it is to have an explosive discharge, I wonder how a planet in a cometary orbit might look.

I know the saturnian cosmology espouses this view.

But if it happened in our solar system once, I would expect that as our telescopes get better and better, that we would see a cometary planet in orbit around another star some day.
It would be reasonable, a logical conclusion from EU tenets, to eventually find a planet with a cometary appearance moving on a highly elliptical orbit around some star. Technical limitations, especially with optical instruments, make that something for the future.

The EU proposes that "comet" is a description of the electrical state of a celestial object. Since this is scalable, a planet having the appearance of a comet is reasonable given the right conditions, and indeed this idea can be extended beyond planets to much larger objects, such as the red giant star Mira having the appearance of comet:
[url2=http://science.nasa.gov/headlines/y2007/15aug_mira.htm]A Star With A Comets Tail[/url2]

Also:
"I was shocked when I first saw this completely unexpected, humongous tail trailing behind a well-known star," said Christopher Martin of the California Institute of Technology in Pasadena, Calif.
http://www.scientificblogging.com/news/ ... ss_the_sky
nick c

Locked

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 19 guests