Rosetta's Final Image

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

Rosetta's Final Image

Unread postby nick c » Sat Sep 30, 2017 11:00 am

Rock, rock, and more rock. Where is the ice?
Final Rosetta photo shows rocky comet surface
User avatar
nick c
Moderator
 
Posts: 2241
Joined: Sun Mar 16, 2008 8:12 pm
Location: connecticut

Re: Rosetta's Final Image

Unread postby Maol » Sat Sep 30, 2017 11:38 am

Mixed in with the dirt. If it wasn't frozen it would be mud, dust, gravel and rocks composed of various metals.
Maol
 
Posts: 240
Joined: Fri Mar 11, 2011 1:40 pm

Re: Rosetta's Final Image

Unread postby GaryN » Sat Sep 30, 2017 3:24 pm

Is near-surface ice the driver of dust activity on 67P/Churyumov-Gerasimenko

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.


https://www.aanda.org/articles/aa/pdf/f ... 000-16.pdf

First they need to accept that there is no heat or visible sunlight out there. The illumination conditions are based on the solar constant model, which is another assumption and has never been directly measured. So the comets very low albedo is not due to the blackness of the surface but to there being no visible light to be reflected in the first place. The only visible light will be from the emissions of the coma materials being energised by the much shorter wavelength solar radiation from the Sun, or perhaps even cosmic rays. "Rock, rock, and more rock." Yes.
In order to change an existing paradigm you do not struggle to try and change the problematic model. You create a new model and make the old one obsolete. -Buckminster Fuller
User avatar
GaryN
 
Posts: 2535
Joined: Tue Apr 01, 2008 8:18 pm
Location: Sooke, BC, Canada

Re: Rosetta's Final Image

Unread postby fosborn_ » Sat Sep 30, 2017 7:51 pm

First they need to accept that there is no heat or visible sunlight out there

You have no shame... :roll:
The most exciting phrase to hear in science,
the one that heralds new discoveries,
is not 'Eureka!' but 'That's funny...'
Isaac Asimov
fosborn_
 
Posts: 476
Joined: Tue May 17, 2011 10:20 am
Location: Kansas

Re: Rosetta's Final Image

Unread postby nick c » Sun Oct 01, 2017 7:45 am

GaryN wrote:First they need to accept that there is no heat or visible sunlight out there
That topic has its own thread and is not appropriate subject matter for a discussion on the Electric Universe board.
User avatar
nick c
Moderator
 
Posts: 2241
Joined: Sun Mar 16, 2008 8:12 pm
Location: connecticut

Re: Rosetta's Final Image

Unread postby Solar » Tue Oct 03, 2017 6:51 pm

In short; their perspective is described here:

Based on observations of the gas emerging from comets, they are known to be rich in ices. As they move closer to the Sun along their orbits, their surfaces are warmed and the ices sublimate into gas, which streams away from the nucleus, dragging along dust particles embedded in the ice to form the coma and tail.

But some of the comet’s dust also remains on the surface as the ice below sublimates, or falls back on to the nucleus elsewhere, coating it with a thin layer of dusty material and leaving very little ice directly exposed on the surface. These processes help to explain why Comet 67P/Churyumov-Gerasimenko and other comets seen in previous flyby missions are so dark. - Exposed Water Ice Detected on Comet's Surface


Interestingly it appears that a cliff collapsed. The characterization went like this:

21 March 2017
Rosetta scientists have made the first compelling link between an outburst of dust and gas and the collapse of a prominent cliff, which also exposed the pristine, icy interior of the comet. - Collapsing Cliff Reveals Comets Interior


The "Water-Ice-Cycle" is described thus:

Scientists using Rosetta’s Visible, InfraRed and Thermal Imaging Spectrometer, VIRTIS, have identified a region on the comet’s surface where water ice appears and disappears in sync with its rotation period. Their findings are published today in the journal Nature.

We found a mechanism that replenishes the surface of the comet with fresh ice at every rotation: this keeps the comet ‘alive’,” says Maria Cristina De Sanctis from INAF-IAPS in Rome, Italy, lead author of the study. - Rosetta Reveals Comet's Water Ice Cycle


So, it appears, that Maol was correct in saying that it's "Mixed in with the dirt." I'll just add that in 2008 the Mars Pheonix lander found ice that sublimated rather quickly upon exposure just barely under the soil: Ice on Mars -- Now it's Gone
"Our laws of force tend to be applied in the Newtonian sense in that for every action there is an equal reaction, and yet, in the real world, where many-body gravitational effects or electrodynamic actions prevail, we do not have every action paired with an equal reaction." — Harold Aspden
User avatar
Solar
 
Posts: 1264
Joined: Mon Mar 17, 2008 3:05 am

Re: Rosetta's Final Image

Unread postby Cargo » Tue Oct 03, 2017 7:56 pm

And this Ice as been sublimating for 4.6 billion years! Sorry, I don't think so.

If the Comet is that old, it would have disappeared into nothing eons ago.
Cargo
 
Posts: 123
Joined: Thu Sep 16, 2010 7:02 pm

Re: Rosetta's Final Image

Unread postby moonkoon » Wed Oct 04, 2017 3:29 am

OK so the surface layer is rock and dirt with some ice mixed in.

How do we get from there to the somtimes short duration, high velocity jets of aqueous chemical cocktail plus dust, not to mention the surface displacement of sand/dust and even large rocks?

Image

The paper linked to by GaryN says the proposed sublimation process is not sufficient to launch the dust.

Are we justified in assuming that the ice that is present in the surface layer is the source of what is observed being ejected? Is the mixed in ice just another part of what is being produced by some as yet 'unknown to science' process?

P.S. Given the array of molecular material being emitted, and in particular high energy products like CN (cyanide) CO etc., I'm wondering if these are not direct products of this unknown process.

For new readers, this thread has some discussion about the subject 
http://www.thunderbolts.info/forum/phpB ... 35#p118722
moonkoon
 
Posts: 74
Joined: Wed Jan 14, 2009 9:37 pm

Re: Rosetta's Final Image

Unread postby IgorTesla » Wed Oct 04, 2017 8:27 am

It's too absurd for words to read that they still can uphold their ridiculous ideas about primordial iceballs when comets are known to orbit the Sun at enourmous distances and at collision/near-collision ranges.
They also travel at enormous speeds and change polarity on it's way.
All the ingredients summed up to exclude the primordial iceball theory in one go, i'd say.

Personally i think that comets are part of the Sun's mechanism and therefor are able to pass close or even enter the Sun's corona unharmed. Actually that could be part of some kind of power transfer mechanism to balance out our Solar system on larger scales...
User avatar
IgorTesla
 
Posts: 55
Joined: Fri Sep 11, 2015 5:36 pm

Re: Rosetta's Final Image

Unread postby GaryN » Wed Oct 04, 2017 10:26 am

moonkoon
How do we get from there to the somtimes short duration, high velocity jets of aqueous chemical cocktail plus dust, not to mention the surface displacement of sand/dust and even large rocks?

Those jets are electron beams. From the NavCam images it can be seen that sometimes the beam is broad, low energy, and as with your image, sometimes tight, higher energy, and will easily be able to remove larger size grains or chunks.
In order to change an existing paradigm you do not struggle to try and change the problematic model. You create a new model and make the old one obsolete. -Buckminster Fuller
User avatar
GaryN
 
Posts: 2535
Joined: Tue Apr 01, 2008 8:18 pm
Location: Sooke, BC, Canada

K2

Unread postby comingfrom » Thu Oct 05, 2017 7:20 pm

Here is a new comet.

Contains an interesting comment about ice
"Because K2 is so far from the sun and so cold, water ice there is frozen like a rock, and we know for sure that the activity—all of the fuzzy stuff making it look like a comet—is not produced by the evaporation of water ice, as it is in other comets," said Jewitt, a professor of planetary science and astronomy. He added that the comet is warming as it approaches the sun.

Jewitt said the Hubble's observations of K2's coma suggest that sunlight is heating frozen volatile gases—such as oxygen, nitrogen, carbon dioxide and carbon monoxide—that coat the comet's frigid surface; and that the coma is formed when those icy volatiles lift off from the comet and release dust.

"I think these volatiles are spread all through K2," he said. "But the volatiles on the surface are the ones that absorb the heat from the sun, so, in a sense, the comet is shedding its outer skin."

Most comets are discovered much closer to the sun—nearer to Jupiter's orbit—so the volatile gases on the surface have already been "baked off" by the time scientists can see them, Jewitt said. "That's why I think K2 is the most primitive comet we've seen."


Astrophysicists observe primitive comet 1.5 billion miles from the sun
User avatar
comingfrom
 
Posts: 759
Joined: Mon Jun 29, 2015 9:11 pm
Location: NSW, Australia

Re: Rosetta's Final Image

Unread postby comingfrom » Thu Oct 05, 2017 8:03 pm

Further observations about that article.

The comet is taking millions of years to get here, but they "know" this is the first time round on this orbit.
They stress this point by saying it is "on it's maiden voyage into the solar system" in the image caption,
and later in the article saying, "entering our solar system's planetary zone for the first time, as K2 is".

Well, they also said it comes from the Oort cloud, which is in the solar system, for a start.
But if it is taking millions of years to get here from the Oort cloud, how can they know this is its first visit to the Sun?

"it has been traveling for millions of years from its home in the frigid outer reaches of the solar system"

They've contradicted themselves, or they don't think the outer reaches of the solar system is part of the solar system.

That's one point.
Another is, if you think logically about his theory of "dust lifting" as the comet is "shedding it's outer skin",
why would that dust not be just trailing behind the comet?
What holds the dust in a nice 80,000 mile diameter sphere? which is 10 times the diameter of Earth.
Is the dust orbiting the 12 mile nucleus?

That theory creates a more questions than it explains.
I think they have been caught out.
The comet is behaving like a comet too far out for their ice theory to hold any water (pardon the pun).

Heartbreaking to listen to, coming from "a professor of planetary science and astronomy".
Paul
User avatar
comingfrom
 
Posts: 759
Joined: Mon Jun 29, 2015 9:11 pm
Location: NSW, Australia

Re: Rosetta's Final Image

Unread postby nick c » Fri Oct 06, 2017 8:54 am

...we know for sure that the activity—all of the fuzzy stuff making it look like a comet—is not produced by the evaporation of water ice, as it is in other comets," said Jewitt, a professor of planetary science and astronomy.
This is a point that has been made by TB project several times. Comets have displayed comas at a distance from the Sun where any water would be frozen. But they still could be interacting with the solar wind.

NASA had published a paper which I have noted in other threads which acknowledges the mechanism for producing hydroxyl atoms (OH) and H2O in the comas of comets by the interaction of the solar wind with the rocky cometary surface. This same process has been attributed as the origin of water on the Moon.

The NASA article:
https://history.nasa.gov/SP-345/ch14.htm
The assumption of ices as important bonding materials in cometary nuclei rests in almost all cases on indirect evidence, specifically the observation of atomic hydrogen (Lyman [Greek letter] alpha
emission) and hydroxyl radical in a vast cloud surrounding the comet, in some cases accompanied by observation of H20+ or neutral water molecules.
In addition, CH3CN, HCN, and corresponding radicals and ions are common constituents of the cometary gas envelope.These observations can be rationalized by assuming (Delsemme, 1972; Mendis, 1973) that the cometary nuclei consist of loose agglomerates containing, in addition to silicates (observed by infrared spectrometry (Maas et al., 1970)) and also water ice with inclusions of volatile carbon and nitrogen compounds.

It has been suggested by Lal (1972b) that the Lyman a emission could be caused by solar wind hydrogen, thermalized on the particles in the dust cloud surrounding the comet. Experiments by Arrhenius and Andersen (1973) irradiating calcium aluminosilicate (anorthite) surfaces with protons in the 10-keV range resulted in a substantial (~10 percent) yield of hydroxyl ion and also hydroxyl ion complexes such as CaOH.

Observations on the lunar surface (Hapke et al., 1970; Epstein and Taylor, 1970, 1972) also demonstrate that such proton-assisted abstraction of oxygen (preferentially O16) from silicates is an active process in space, resulting in a flux of OH and related species.In cometary particle streams, new silicate surfaces would relatively frequently be exposed by fracture and fusion at grain collision. The production of hydroxyl radicals and ions would in this case not be rate-limited by surface saturation to the same extent as on the Moon (for lunar soil turnover rate, see Arrhenius et al. (1972)).

These observations, although not negating the possible occurrence of water ice in cometary nuclei, point also to refractory sources of the actually observed hydrogen and hydroxyl. Solar protons as well as the products of their reaction with silicate oxygen would interact with any solid carbon and nitrogen compounds characteristic of carbonaceous chondrites to yield volatile carbon and nitrogen radicals such as observed in comets. Phenomena such as "flares," "breakups," "high-velocity jets," and nongravitational [236] acceleration are all phenomena that fit well into a theory ascribing them to the evaporation of frozen volatiles. However, with different semantic labels the underlying observations would also seem to be interpretable as manifestations of the focusing and dispersion processes in the cometary region of the meteor stream, accompanied by solar wind interaction.

Highlights added.

The dirty snowball model originally required that comets were composed of a loose conglomeration of dust mixed into an ice ball. After visiting several comets it is apparent that the comets are rocky objects, so now, consensus astronomy has put the water in the interior or just under the rocky surface. This is an ad hoc attempt to save a dying theory.
The EU theory is that comets are basically asteroids on highly elliptical orbits, and that the detection of hydroxyls in the coma are the result of the interaction of an electric current (euphemistically called the 'solar wind') interacting with the rocky surface. In the EU model asteroids and comets are not primordial leftovers from the formation of the solar system but rather are the debris from electrical excavation of planetary surfaces during a recent reordering of the solar system.
User avatar
nick c
Moderator
 
Posts: 2241
Joined: Sun Mar 16, 2008 8:12 pm
Location: connecticut

Re: Rosetta's Final Image

Unread postby comingfrom » Fri Oct 06, 2017 7:15 pm

Thank you, Nick.

Wow, I find this wording very strange.
... interpretable as manifestations of the focusing and dispersion processes in the cometary region of the meteor stream, accompanied by solar wind interaction.
I had to go and look up meteor stream.

Meteor Stream from Swinburne Uni Encyclopedia of Astronomy.

None of it sounds right to me.
Meteorite showers like the Leonids aren't from comets, are they?
Or maybe they are from one that disintegrated.
Anyway, this explanation is totally reliant on the snowball model, so it easy to disbelieve.

I suggest a better interpetation

... interpretable as manifestations of the focusing and dispersion processes in the cometary region of the electric current, accompanied by solar wind interaction.

An electric current focusing in on the nucleus helps explain the coma, and dispersion of the current is seen as a tail, or tails.
Or is that too logical?
Paul
User avatar
comingfrom
 
Posts: 759
Joined: Mon Jun 29, 2015 9:11 pm
Location: NSW, Australia

Re: Rosetta's Final Image

Unread postby Solar » Sat Oct 07, 2017 5:58 am

nick c wrote:
These observations, although not negating the possible occurrence of water ice in cometary nuclei, point also to refractory sources of the actually observed hydrogen and hydroxyl. Solar protons as well as the products of their reaction with silicate oxygen would interact with any solid carbon and nitrogen compounds characteristic of carbonaceous chondrites to yield volatile carbon and nitrogen radicals such as observed in comets. Phenomena such as "flares," "breakups," "high-velocity jets," and nongravitational [236] acceleration are all phenomena that fit well into a theory ascribing them to the evaporation of frozen volatiles. [highlight]However, with different semantic labels the underlying observations would also seem to be interpretable as manifestations of the focusing and dispersion processes in the cometary region of the meteor stream, accompanied by solar wind interaction.

The NASA article:
https://history.nasa.gov/SP-345/ch14.htm


Oh, I like that one.

There’s a bit of history one doesn't hear much about; if at all: “non-gravitational acceleration” due to “rocket-like thrusting of the outgassing cometary nucleus.”

So: Here one has a comets each with their own particulars “outgassing” under the dirty snowball-fried ice cream model when cracks, fissures, landslides from cliffs, active vents supposedly expose volatiles which then sublimate possibly inducing small accelerations of said comet called “nongravitational accelerations”.

The accuracies of the orbits and ephemerides for active comets are most often limited by imperfectly modeled rocket-like accelerations experienced by active comets as a result of the outgassing cometary nucleus near perihelion. The standard nongravitational acceleration model proposed by Marsden et al. (1973) has been updated by allowing the nucleus outgassing to act asymmetrically with respect to perihelion, providing for time-dependent effects through the precession of the cometary nucleus and accounting for the outgassing from discrete surface areas on a rotating nucleus. While the most accurate nongravitational models will likely require a detailed a priori knowledge of a comet’s surface activity and rotation characteristics, it is becoming possible to use only astrometric data to actually solve for some of the parameters that describe the comet’s outgassing and rotational characteristics. - Cometary Orbit Determination and Nongravitational Forces D. K. Yeomans and P. W. Chodas


Not to ignore other influences but Section “2. Historical Introduction to Nongravitational Effects” provides a brief historical account. Sometimes the nongravitational accelerating effect can be deduced with some comets; sometimes not. Section 5 is also interesting. Here, nongravitational parameters were applied to 23 long period comets. In the application, long period comets apparently showed “a few to 10 time larger that similar accelerations detected for short-period comets (Marsden et al).”

Why is that interesting?

A comet is a negatively charged object moving through the extensive and constant radial electric field of the positively charged Sun (see below). A comet becomes negatively charged during its long sojourn in the outer solar system. As it speeds into the inner solar system, the increasing voltage and charge density of the plasma (solar “wind”) cause the comet to discharge electrically, producing the bright coma and tails. – Holoscience: The Deep Impact of Comet Theory


If correct it would seem that long period comets might be more favorable to "nongravitational accelerations" via “discharging” (or “outgassing”) as they enter “the increasing voltage and charge density of the plasma”. No pun intended but that’s an interesting potential "rocket-like" relationship.
"Our laws of force tend to be applied in the Newtonian sense in that for every action there is an equal reaction, and yet, in the real world, where many-body gravitational effects or electrodynamic actions prevail, we do not have every action paired with an equal reaction." — Harold Aspden
User avatar
Solar
 
Posts: 1264
Joined: Mon Mar 17, 2008 3:05 am

Next

Return to Electric Universe

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests