Electric Comets

Historic planetary instability and catastrophe. Evidence for electrical scarring on planets and moons. Electrical events in today's solar system. Electric Earth.

Moderators: MGmirkin, bboyer

Re: Comet Erosion?

Unread postby flyingcloud » Fri Mar 24, 2017 3:37 am

LaSuisse1 wrote:The cliff collapses due to thermal stress. Contraction and expansion over and over. Due to heat. The temperature swings are large, and immediate.
...

There is also no chance that the bright spots you mention are 'hot'. One of the links I left in the other thread shows temperature maps of where ice was detected. It is colder. Not surprisingly.


Thanks for the Link, I love a scavenger hunt.

And NO CHANCE they're hot, you see it's DUE TO HEAT. I have precisely no idea what that means.

We have bright spots in moon craters identified as discharge activity. Your turn to hunt.


edited to add link..

like leading a horse to water (ice)

https://phys.org/news/2017-01-nasa-sola ... -moon.html

Powerful solar storms can charge up the soil in frigid, permanently shadowed regions near the lunar poles, and may possibly produce "sparks" that could vaporize and melt the soil, perhaps as much as meteoroid impacts, according to NASA-funded research. This alteration may become evident when analyzing future samples from these regions that could hold the key to understanding the history of the moon and solar system.

The moon has almost no atmosphere, so its surface is exposed to the harsh space environment. Impacts from small meteoroids constantly churn or "garden" the top layer of the dust and rock, called regolith, on the moon. "About 10 percent of this gardened layer has been melted or vaporized by meteoroid impacts," said Andrew Jordan of the University of New Hampshire, Durham. "We found that in the moon's permanently shadowed regions, sparks from solar storms could melt or vaporize a similar percentage."
Last edited by flyingcloud on Fri Mar 24, 2017 3:54 am, edited 2 times in total.
flyingcloud
 
Posts: 488
Joined: Fri Nov 07, 2008 2:07 am
Location: Honey Brook

Re: Comet Erosion?

Unread postby D_Archer » Fri Mar 24, 2017 3:50 am

flyingcloud wrote:
LaSuisse1 wrote:The cliff collapses due to thermal stress. Contraction and expansion over and over. Due to heat. The temperature swings are large, and immediate.l


Heat is photons.

Regards,
Daniel
- Shoot Forth Thunder -
User avatar
D_Archer
 
Posts: 1088
Joined: Sat Apr 18, 2009 4:01 am
Location: The Netherlands

Re: Comet Erosion?

Unread postby webolife » Fri Mar 24, 2017 7:51 am

I'm not a "photon bombardment" kind of guy myself, but I do understand that heat is "absorbed" or "interrupted" light; and that ionization is also a light action; moreover in my model gravitation and light are manifestations of the same unified pressure field. All that for other threads, however.

What is clear from LaSuisse1's Rosetta links is that there are transient cycles of formation and sublimation of detectable water on the surface of the comet. What is questionable is the origin of this water, eg. it is an assumption that water is found in large amounts below the surface dusts. If, as in our moon's polar regions, there is a presence of hydroxyls interacting with solar H+ ions to form transient H2O, it is possible and perhaps even likely that something similar is occurring on cometary surfaces. Between 0.1% and 4% transient water among the materials found at the [occasionally] "bright" spots in the Rosetta studies does not make for a very convincing "dirty snowball" claim imo.
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.
User avatar
webolife
 
Posts: 2398
Joined: Mon Mar 17, 2008 2:01 pm
Location: Seattle

Re: Comet Erosion?

Unread postby comingfrom » Fri Mar 24, 2017 7:19 pm

Thank you, LaSuisse1.

I have precisely no idea what you mean by photon bombardment! The cliff collapses due to thermal stress.
Heat is infrared photons, so thermal stress is photon bombardment, to me.

There is also no chance that the bright spots you mention are 'hot'. One of the links I left in the other thread shows temperature maps of where ice was detected. It is colder. Not surprisingly.
If that is an entry point for the photons, the infrared gets sucked out of the region, which explains colder.

Like the poles on Earth.

~Paul
User avatar
comingfrom
 
Posts: 759
Joined: Mon Jun 29, 2015 9:11 pm
Location: NSW, Australia

Re: Comet Erosion?

Unread postby webolife » Sat Mar 25, 2017 3:57 pm

IR gets "sucked out"???? Yikes!
Maybe what you're trying to say is there is higher albedo or greater reflection, therefore less light absorption [IR "is" detected absorption]. Or maybe you weren't, but should have...
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.
User avatar
webolife
 
Posts: 2398
Joined: Mon Mar 17, 2008 2:01 pm
Location: Seattle

Re: Comet Erosion?

Unread postby perpetual motion » Sat Mar 25, 2017 8:43 pm

Well, my guess would be that people read articles, but don't really care about how informative they
are unless they go with THEIR theory or THEIR thinking. One might as well be talking to a fence post.

Read the Boring Sun articles on this web site!
perpetual motion
 
Posts: 137
Joined: Mon Mar 24, 2008 9:04 pm

Re: Comet Erosion?

Unread postby comingfrom » Sat Mar 25, 2017 10:15 pm

You're right. Thank you. I definitely needed some help there.
User avatar
comingfrom
 
Posts: 759
Joined: Mon Jun 29, 2015 9:11 pm
Location: NSW, Australia

Re: Comet Erosion?

Unread postby D_Archer » Mon Mar 27, 2017 1:45 am

Charge as heat as photons allows us to make sense of cometary asteroids.

Electric Universe tracks E/M, ions and electrons and Rosetta did measurements for this and proved there is electrical activity around the asteroid.

Mainstream uses UV light (which is photons) for interactions (also supposed interaction) in the coma.

Now we only have to track how photons interact with the asteroid, what is their main motion. Normally charge enters poles of matter (atoms, planets, stars etc), this would also happen with cometary asteroids, the greater charge movement would also direct the movement of ions and electrons. We can safely say that this action causes the erosion we see on cometary asteroids as the middle (neck) is clearly being eroded away. Anywhere charge enters or exits can become a point of discharge (dark discharges most likely) and the greater action is where the greater number enter/exit. This would be high points (cliff faces) and the aforementioned pole action.

Regards,
Daniel
- Shoot Forth Thunder -
User avatar
D_Archer
 
Posts: 1088
Joined: Sat Apr 18, 2009 4:01 am
Location: The Netherlands

Re: Comet Erosion?

Unread postby LaSuisse1 » Sun Apr 02, 2017 4:15 pm

Oh dear. More non-science, and making stuff up again! All that is happening, just as it does on Earth, is that the ground is heated by the Sun. And then the Sun goes away, and it gets very cold. Very quickly. And then it comes back and it gets much warmer. Very quickly. That is thermal stress. No need to make up silly stuff. It happens on Earth.
And the comet isn't an 'asteroid'. That is silly also. We know the density, we know there is lots of ice, we know it is very porous. Rosetta also visited asteroids. Very different density. Made of rock. No rock on 67P. And there is no measured electrical activity on the nucleus. Philae landed on it, as did Rosetta. Very unelectrical. Not a smidgeon of a magnetic field to be seen. Remarkably non-magnetic.
Quite where you guys get these weird ideas is beyond me. It isn't anything to do with real science, though.
LaSuisse1
 
Posts: 9
Joined: Wed Mar 22, 2017 4:37 pm

Re: Comet Erosion?

Unread postby webolife » Sun Apr 02, 2017 7:53 pm

LaSuisse1,
Not sure what your interest is in TB forums, but if it involves exploring the possibility of other paradigms in cosmology and astronomy, formation of stars, and a better understanding of space weather and the interactions of interplanetary bodies, then this is the forum for you... welcome; or if you feel like you are an experienced astronomer with research-based insights that you are here to share with the rest of us in respectfully open dialogue... we are all ears, welcome! If however you are fixed in your own limited mainstream perspective, and unable to take a second look at processes occurring in space that are "anomalous" to the mainstream; or if the idea of "alternative" scientific paradigms is inherently odious to you, this is probably not the place for you...

But I get the feeling that something about the EU piqued your curiosity, and you'd really like to broaden your outlook a bit. That being the case, let me share a couple personal perspectives with you. I am trained in science and math, taught in public education for the last 4 decades, and am an amateur astronomer and geologist, with special interests in genetics and physics, particularly optics. I have been exploring catastrophic scenarios as a basis for understanding earth history, and the extended frame of catastrophic interplanetary science. I've done my share of criticizing some of the more extreme views shared on these forums, but I try to do so with open-minded questioning, challenging assertions with counterclaims, asking for clarification... I hope that by doing so, more "science" [as you often reference] will emerge, and consequentially greater understanding by all, including myself. More specifically to your post, one of the early predictions of the "electric comet" hypothesis was that comet nuclei and asteroids would be found to be of similar compositions, within a range of types. It has been understood for almost a century that not all asteroidal bodies are of the same composition, and this is believed to be true of comets as well. The basic claim of the "electric comet" is that asteroidal bodies, whether of KBO or inner asteroid belt or other origin, interact with the electrical solar environment [the "solar wind" if you prefer] in a significant way due to their changing positions within that environment. This is being studied by many comet and asteroid researchers, whose conclusions on this matter are a great deal less certain than the claims you are making. It is unknown why some comets seem to present a magnetic field while others do not. The low concentrations of hydroxyls/water actually found on comets is one pointer away from the "icy snowball" presumption and toward the "electric comet" idea; the similarity of "peanut" morphologies between many observed asteroids and comet nuclei is another; the recognition that comet nuclei "degenerate" into asteroids and asteroids may periodically "cometize" [eg. ] is another "anomaly" that EU predicts but the mainstream does not. I try to encourage various posters to use language of tentativity [a good science practice] rather than make dogmatic claims. Might I suggest the same for you?
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.
User avatar
webolife
 
Posts: 2398
Joined: Mon Mar 17, 2008 2:01 pm
Location: Seattle

Re: Comet Erosion?

Unread postby comingfrom » Tue Apr 04, 2017 3:25 pm

Thank you, LaSuisse1.

Oh dear. More non-science, and making stuff up again! All that is happening, just as it does on Earth, is that the ground is heated by the Sun. And then the Sun goes away, and it gets very cold. Very quickly. And then it comes back and it gets much warmer. Very quickly. That is thermal stress. No need to make up silly stuff. It happens on Earth.
This is non science too, since heat is not explained.

How does the Sun transfer heat to the comet?
By radiation, you will say.
What is being radiated?
Photons, you should say.
What are photons?
Massless point particles, is the scientific answer.
So, how do massless point particles create thermal stress?
The science is still out on that.

And the comet isn't an 'asteroid'.
What is the difference between a comet and asteroid?
Besides the orbit, I mean.

That is silly also.
Is that a scientific statement?

We know the density, we know there is lots of ice, we know it is very porous.
I know. I read it. The density is even less than the density of jets that come off the comet.

Could there possibly be another cause for the low density readings?
Like if it isn't in the same plane of the Sun's field, for example?
Or maybe the heat photons and the thermal stresses effect the trajectory, which throws the density equations.

I don't know what the answer is, but all I know is, many density readings don't seem right.
The moon is oft said to be hollow or porous too, due to the density (maybe it is a captured comet).
Mars' moons also, are far less dense than expected.
But without tails containing hydroxides, these are not said to be made of ice.

No rock on 67P.
67P is a rock, and rocks are clearly visible on the surface.
These visible rocks are very apparently not ice bergs.

And there is no measured electrical activity on the nucleus.
Did Philae use a multimeter?

Very unelectrical. Not a smidgeon of a magnetic field to be seen. Remarkably non-magnetic.
Water on it's own is a very electrical substance. Even when ice.

Are comet tails simply steam rising from thermally stressed ice, to you?

Quite where you guys get these weird ideas is beyond me. It isn't anything to do with real science, though.
You appear to forget that you are at the electric universe forum.
We here go with the concept that the whole Universe is electric.

We already know "real" science isn't electric, and that they leave out electricity where ever they suppose they can.
We here consider that unscientific.
~Paul
User avatar
comingfrom
 
Posts: 759
Joined: Mon Jun 29, 2015 9:11 pm
Location: NSW, Australia

Re: Electric Comets

Unread postby sol88 » Mon Jul 10, 2017 12:45 am

Would I be correct in thinking the following or I'm I way out?

If, as the electric comet theory states comets are rock that assume the charge of the plasma around them and discharge as they move into a more positive region of the solar system, would we not expect to see a big mob of dense cold electrons somewhere very close to the nucleus? i.e discharge in the "dark mode"

Would this new paper lend some weight to this reasoning?

Cold and warm electrons at comet 67P
A. I. Eriksson1, I. A. D. Engelhardt1; 2, M. André1, R. Boström1, N. J. T. Edberg1,
F. L. Johansson1; 2, E. Odelstad1; 2, E. Vigren1, J.-E. Wahlund1, P. Henri3, J.-P. Lebreton3,
W. J. Miloch4, J. J. P. Paulsson4, C. Simon Wedlund4, L. Yang4, T. Karlsson5, R. Jarvinen6,
T. Broiles7, K. Mandt7; 8, C. M. Carr9, M. Galand9, H. Nilsson10, and C. Norberg10


DOI: https://doi.org/10.1051/0004-6361/201630159

4.3. Cold plasma filamentation
The LAP probe current pulses presented in Section 3 were
found to be due to localised plasma regions of high density
and low electron temperature. Such density variations are
not unexpected since they developed in the hybrid simulations
for 67P at 1.3 AU by Koenders et al. (2015).


I thinking that's a "thank ya mother for the rabbits" sorta paper?
“Black holes are where God divided by zero.” – Comedian Steven Wright
User avatar
sol88
 
Posts: 41
Joined: Fri Apr 11, 2008 12:22 am
Location: The East Kimberley, Western Australia

Re: Electric Comets

Unread postby GaryN » Thu Sep 28, 2017 9:46 pm

Hubble observes the farthest active inbound comet yet seen
Image
NASA's Hubble Space Telescope has photographed the farthest active inbound comet ever seen, at a whopping distance of 1.5 billion miles from the Sun (beyond Saturn's orbit). Slightly warmed by the remote Sun, it has already begun to develop an 80,000-mile-wide fuzzy cloud of dust, called a coma, enveloping a tiny, solid nucleus of frozen gas and dust. These observations represent the earliest signs of activity ever seen from a comet entering the solar system's planetary zone for the first time.

https://phys.org/news/2017-09-hubble-fa ... comet.html
:roll:
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: 2536
Joined: Tue Apr 01, 2008 8:18 pm
Location: Sooke, BC, Canada

Re: Comet Erosion?

Unread postby Maol » Sat Sep 30, 2017 12:07 pm

webolife wrote:I'm not a "photon bombardment" kind of guy myself, but I do understand that heat is "absorbed" or "interrupted" light; and that ionization is also a light action; moreover in my model gravitation and light are manifestations of the same unified pressure field. All that for other threads, however.

What is clear from LaSuisse1's Rosetta links is that there are transient cycles of formation and sublimation of detectable water on the surface of the comet. What is questionable is the origin of this water, eg. it is an assumption that water is found in large amounts below the surface dusts. If, as in our moon's polar regions, there is a presence of hydroxyls interacting with solar H+ ions to form transient H2O, it is possible and perhaps even likely that something similar is occurring on cometary surfaces. Between 0.1% and 4% transient water among the materials found at the [occasionally] "bright" spots in the Rosetta studies does not make for a very convincing "dirty snowball" claim imo.

The likely scenario for the origin of water is the solar wind contains H+ ions and O- ions and the twain shall meet.
Maol
 
Posts: 242
Joined: Fri Mar 11, 2011 1:40 pm

Re: Electric Comets

Unread postby webolife » Sat Sep 30, 2017 10:27 pm

Maol wrote:he likely scenario for the origin of water is the solar wind contains H+ ions and O- ions and the twain shall meet.

I think you meant OH- ions + H+ ios => H20...
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.
User avatar
webolife
 
Posts: 2398
Joined: Mon Mar 17, 2008 2:01 pm
Location: Seattle

PreviousNext

Return to Electric Universe - Planetary Science

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests