Mercury Updates

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: Mercury Updates

Unread postby Anaconda » Fri Oct 02, 2009 8:24 am

Lloyd wrote:* Well, in today's TPOD we finally have someone on the Thunderbolts team acknowledging that another planetoid besides Venus and Titan may be less than ten thousand years old http://thunderbolts.info/tpod/2009/arch ... 1flyby.htm . So does anyone still want to claim that it's impossible that Earth may be less than 50,000 years old? I had stated somewhere on the forum that it may be only a few ten thousand years old and numerous folks opined that my suspicion is absurd. I hope they're now ready to take that opinion back.


Lloyd:

Impossible?

If you state that it is impossible to know how old Earth is (which I subscribe to), then one can't exclude any possible dating, outright.

But the overwhelming weight of the scientific evidence does not support your assertion that Earth is "less than 50,000 years old".

Yes, I read the TPOD on Mercury and noted the 10,000 years old statement.

But the reason given for the conclusion is speculation at best because there are numerous other possiblities for why there is a residual tenuous atmosphere.

Regrettably, the 10,000 year statement seems more based on "other considerations " than the actual evidence observed & measured on Mercury, itself.
Last edited by Anaconda on Fri Oct 02, 2009 8:33 am, edited 2 times in total.
Anaconda
 
Posts: 460
Joined: Wed Apr 15, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Mercury Updates

Unread postby junglelord » Fri Oct 02, 2009 8:28 am

Earth is only how old Lloyd????
:?

And Bigfoot is on Mercury
http://spaceweather.com/swpod2009/02oct ... stp1jo30g5

Don't believe everything your told.
:lol:
If you only knew the magnificence of the 3, 6 and 9, then you would have a key to the universe.
— Nikola Tesla
Casting Out the Nines from PHI into Indigs reveals the Cosmic Harmonic Code.
— Junglelord.
Knowledge is Structured in Consciouness. Structure and Function Cannot Be Seperated.
— Junglelord
User avatar
junglelord
 
Posts: 3693
Joined: Mon Mar 17, 2008 5:39 am
Location: Canada

Re: EDM on Mercury caught by MESSENGER

Unread postby solrey » Fri Oct 02, 2009 8:55 am

MattEU, thanks for posting that Martian dust devil. Nice comparison.

According to NASA:

Color images from MESSENGER's Wide Angle Camera reveal that the irregular depression and bright halo have distinctive color.


If those bright spots and filaments were camera saturation artifacts, they would have mentioned that in conjunction with the color images. Haven't seen the color images anywhere yet...hmmmmm. :?
I tried to resolve the filaments as surface features, by manipulating the image, but that seems pretty unlikely to be the case, especially since the color images describe a "bright halo".

I can't find a link again, but I remember reading somewhere that they think the large white patch is magnesium oxide from "volcanic vents". :lol:

Notice how the larger, white stained region is pretty much centered on a large, circular, flat bottomed crater, and the "irregular depression" with the bright halo's lies right along the rim of it. I'm thinking that a previous discharge created the larger crater and the large white patch of electro-chemically created magnesium oxide. The current image shows a glow discharge eating away at the rim.


Check this out.

We have observed for the first time a deposition of MgO microparticles with spherical shape. Experiment has been carried out in a small coaxial electrode system for an impulse discharge, consisting of an inner Mg-rod electrode of 1.7 mm in diameter, and an outer ring electrode, between which a small-diameter glass tube substrate is placed. From the SEM and Raman analyses, we have observed a formation of MgO particles with size less than several 500 nm. Most of the particles are spherical in shape, and distributed on the glass surface near the electrodes. The formation processes of the spherical particles are discussed.


Mercury has a thin silicate crust (glass beads?), and has abundant magnesium as well, upwards of 25% I think. This area in question is probably a much higher concentration of magnesium, probably around 75% (as a top of the head guesstimate).
There is also NaSiO4 (sodium silicate) detected on the surface...Mercury has a cometary sodium tail
and a surprising amount of OH. Electro-chemical reactions with solar plasma stream protons H+ would pretty much provide all the chemical ingredients to produce MgO, Na vapor, and probably H2O that pretty much instantly reacts with the free Na vapor in the discharge column/corona, to produce OH and another free hydrogen to add back into the reaction mix.
:ugeek:
“Today's scientists have substituted mathematics for experiments, and they wander off through equation after equation, and eventually build a structure which has no relation to reality"
Nikola Tesla
User avatar
solrey
 
Posts: 631
Joined: Fri Jan 30, 2009 12:54 pm

Re: EDM on Mercury caught by MESSENGER

Unread postby Aardwolf » Fri Oct 02, 2009 9:35 am

If it were EDM shouldn't the far wall of the crater be illuminated as well? However, it looks even darker than the other craters.

In fact most of the larger crater walls in the picture look enhanced so IMO it more like a reflection off the suface catching all of the rims. Which is a little disconcerting as it doesn't appear to be the sun which is casting shadows at a different angle.
Aardwolf
 
Posts: 1289
Joined: Tue Jul 28, 2009 7:56 am

Re: EDM on Mercury caught by MESSENGER

Unread postby MGmirkin » Fri Oct 02, 2009 3:34 pm

MattEU wrote:Image Image

The left image is a closer view of the crater. Image on the right is a Martian dust devil showing its bright white EDM at its base.


I'm not sure whether the issue was specifically resolved or not, but it was brought up that many of the Martian dust devil images show the brightest section to always be below the horizon. Thus it has been suggested that the dust devil's base isn't self-luminous so much as contrast-enhanced in post-processing, so that the shape of the dust devil can be seen against the dark terrain. Again, I don't recall whether a specific answer was obtained on that point. But in lieu of a definitive answer, I'm leery of assuming the dust devils are self-luminous at their bases (despite some substantial initial enthusiasm upon having first viewed the images). Sometimes positive bias and undisclosed post-processing can add up to seeing things or interpreting things that maybe aren't physically present in the actual image itself (be it pre-or-post processing).

In a few cases I've had to rein in my own enthusiasm on certain subjects as better imaging has come available (I'm less sure on the genesis of Martian spiders today than I was a few years ago) or alternate plausible explanations have been offered (such as possible contrast-enhancement not specifically disclosed in image releases), etc.

Which isn't to say I completely discount the ideas now, simply that I'm a bit more skeptical, though still quite open-minded.

Just saying.

Best,
~Michael Gmirkin
"The purpose of science is to investigate the unexplained, not to explain the uninvestigated." ~Dr. Stephen Rorke
"For every PhD there is an equal and opposite PhD." ~Gibson's law
User avatar
MGmirkin
Moderator
 
Posts: 1667
Joined: Thu Mar 13, 2008 11:00 pm
Location: Beaverton, Oregon, USA

Re: EDM on Mercury caught by MESSENGER

Unread postby Lloyd » Fri Oct 02, 2009 5:06 pm

MattEU:
Can anyone find any images of the bright spots on the mountains on Venus?

* Here's what Thornhill has said about Venus' bright surface in his 2003 article, called "The Shiny Mountains of Venus".
http://www.google.com/#hl=en&source=hp& ... 2e99206b9c
David Grinspoon writes in, Venus Revealed, (1997): ‘One of the most puzzling [patterns] was this: the highest mountains of Venus are all surprisingly shiny. At altitudes above about thirteen thousand feet, the reflectivity jumps up and the ground abruptly gets very bright.
...In March, 1997 I wrote in response to Grinspoon’s colorful suggestion that the radar bright highlands of Venus are coated with ‘fool’s gold’: “A much simpler answer is that diffuse electric discharge, known on Earth as ‘St. Elmo's fire,’ occurs preferentially at the higher altitudes of the mountains on Venus. In that thick atmosphere it forms a highly conductive dense plasma, which is a superb reflector of radar signals.”

* Here's an image of Venus from http://snippetsaffairs.blogspot.com/200 ... rface.html.
Image
* I suppose the bright area on Mercury would not be St. Elmo's fire, since it seems to be on a low area and in a thin atmosphere. But it also could still be an "arc welder" event. Would MgO appear that bright?
* Here's a "Reaction of Magnesium with Oxygen" from http://jchemed.chem.wisc.edu/JCESOFT/CC ... /PAGE1.HTM .
Image
Magnesium metal is burned in air forming magnesium oxide. This is an interesting oxidation/reduction reaction because it shows the burning of a metal, because the products of the reaction are visible afterwards, and because it produces a lot of light.

* So maybe some of the magnesium in that area on Mercury is reacting with oxygen somehow [electrically?] to form first a bright flame, then bright white MgO. There's not much air on Mercury, and the only oxygen in the air may be the hydroxyl ion, OH-, but maybe that's enough. There's probably significant interplanetary current on Mercury from the solar wind etc, and the part of the planet directly "under" the sun should receive the strongest current.
Lloyd
 
Posts: 4330
Joined: Fri Apr 04, 2008 2:54 pm

Re: EDM on Mercury caught by MESSENGER

Unread postby solrey » Fri Oct 02, 2009 5:27 pm

I thought that looked familiar MattEU.
Previously I talked about a likely electro-chemical reaction chain.

Mercury has a thin silicate crust (glass beads?), and has abundant magnesium as well, upwards of 25% I think. This area in question is probably a much higher concentration of magnesium, probably around 75% (as a top of the head guesstimate).
There is also NaSiO4 (sodium silicate) detected on the surface...Mercury has a cometary sodium tail
and a surprising amount of OH. Electro-chemical reactions with solar plasma stream protons H+ would pretty much provide all the chemical ingredients to produce MgO, Na vapor, and probably H2O that pretty much instantly reacts with the free Na vapor in the discharge column/corona, to produce OH and another free hydrogen to add back into the reaction mix.


Check out how similar that pattern on the image of Venus looks to the magnetic map of Mars.

Image

Image


Image
Click image for HiRes version.

Pretty darn close, eh?
“Today's scientists have substituted mathematics for experiments, and they wander off through equation after equation, and eventually build a structure which has no relation to reality"
Nikola Tesla
User avatar
solrey
 
Posts: 631
Joined: Fri Jan 30, 2009 12:54 pm

Re: Mercury Updates

Unread postby Lloyd » Fri Oct 02, 2009 5:41 pm

Anaconda:
But the overwhelming weight of the scientific evidence does not support your assertion that Earth is "less than 50,000 years old".

* Which dating method have you found to be reliable? EU theorists have tentatively concluded that all conventional dating methods are highly unreliable, because they're all based on uniformitarian assumptions. Most dating methods rely on radioactive decay and the assumption that the decay constant is constant for each isotope. EU theorists have stated that the constant is likely not constant, such as perhaps under conditions of greater electrical stress. Conventional dating denies that electrical discharges can transmute elements, which, if untrue, which it almost certainly is, would throw off measurements completely. Robert Gentry found that basement rock, at least granite, has radiohaloes with missing parent haloes, meaning that the basement rock crystalized almost instantly, instead of over millions and billions of years.
* Some methods, like C14, seem to be somewhat reliable for a few thousand years, but not more than 5 or 10 thousand.
* Here's a little of what Thornhill has said.
http://www.holoscience.com/news/wateronmars.html
The thesis presented on this website tells a completely different history of Mars, based upon the electrical nature of the solar system and recent chaotic orbital behavior. It may seem outrageous to propose a completely different Mars about 10,000 years ago, instead of 3,500 million years ago in the conventional story. However, the dating techniques used by geologists rely on a belief in fictional and endlessly adjustable planetary evolution stories – a different story for each planet. These stories have proven to be totally non-predictive. Good science requires accounting for as much of the relevant evidence as possible. Instead of working forward from a set of beliefs about the past, we should first assemble all the data we can, including that from the stories told by ancient people about the behavior of objects they saw in the sky. A forensic method can glean useful information from these archaic stories, rituals, and art that can help distinguish between alternative explanations for present conditions.
... So, what are we to make of the orthodox dating of the channels on Mars to almost 4 billion years ago? Relative dating of surface features relies upon comparisons of crater counts on the surfaces of Mars and other bodies. Radioactive clocks are then used to pin down the age of surface rocks. We have for that purpose rock samples from the Moon and a small number of meteorites identified as originating from Mars. But if the initial states of the rocks are unknown and the clocks can be upset by energetic electrical discharges, geologists are left with little else to date the surface features of Mars other than to count craters. And that is a method based on two crucial and erroneous assumptions:
The first assumption is that the solar system has run like clockwork for 5 billion years.
...The second assumption is that planetary craters are caused by the impacts of comets and asteroids.

http://www.holoscience.com/news.php?art ... 5jc&pf=YES
The crucial factor missing from radioactive dating and cosmogony is the electrical nature of the universe as described by the new science of plasma cosmology. Stars are an electrical phenomenon and their planets are involved in the stellar electrical circuit. The most common manifestation on Earth of this connection is lightning. But the origin of lightning remains a mystery due to the collective blind spot about cosmic electricity. If stars are an electrical phenomenon then the life story of the Sun is fictional. If planets have suffered powerful electrical discharges in the past then they are not closed energetic systems and radioactive dating is rendered practically worthless. Rather than concoct stories about the unimaginably distant past, we should reconstruct our recent past as effectively as we can to see what we might have missed.
Lloyd
 
Posts: 4330
Joined: Fri Apr 04, 2008 2:54 pm

Re: Mercury Updates

Unread postby Anaconda » Fri Oct 02, 2009 11:12 pm

Lloyd:

I am familiar with the problems with radiocarbon dating. I agree that it is problematic and can not be relied on.

Anaconda wrote:
If you state that it is impossible to know how old Earth is (which I subscribe to), then one can't exclude any possible dating, outright.


The reasons offered by Wal Thornhill, regarding electromagnetic energy, are why I stated it is impossible to know how old the Earth is.

Notice that Wal Thornhill never offers a "date of creation" for the Earth.

There is other evidence besides radiocarbon dating that suggests the Earth is older than 50,000 years old.
Anaconda
 
Posts: 460
Joined: Wed Apr 15, 2009 9:32 am

Re: EDM on Mercury caught by MESSENGER

Unread postby MattEU » Sat Oct 03, 2009 1:16 am

Image

first detection of magnesium in Mercurys exosphere

The histogram in this figure represents a typical MASCS observation in the tail region of Mercury’s exosphere from magnesium atoms. These MASCS measurements mark the first time that magnesium has been detected in Mercury’s exosphere. In contrast to emissions from sodium and calcium (see PIA11402), magnesium emission occurs at a wavelength that is in the ultraviolet part of the spectrum. Magnesium has not been observed from ground-based telescopes partly because it emits at ultraviolet wavelengths, which are completely obscured by Earth’s atmosphere. Because these atoms primarily originate at the surface of Mercury, the detection of magnesium in the exosphere provides evidence that magnesium is a component of surface material, something that has been expected for years but until now had not been proven. As with calcium and sodium, the distribution of magnesium in Mercury’s exosphere is a result of the processes that release the magnesium atoms from the surface and can provide valuable clues to the relative importance of each process.

Date Acquired: October 6, 2008
Instrument: Mercury Atmospheric and Surface Composition Spectrometer (MASCS)


The spacecraft also made the first detection of magnesium in Mercury's thin atmosphere, known as an exosphere. This observation and other data confirm that magnesium is an important constituent of Mercury's surface materials.

The probe's Mercury Atmospheric and Surface Composition Spectrometer instrument detected the magnesium. Finding magnesium was not surprising to scientists, but seeing it in the amounts and distribution observed was unexpected. The instrument also measured other exospheric constituents, including calcium and sodium.

MESSENGER Spacecraft Reveals a Very Dynamic Planet Mercury
User avatar
MattEU
 
Posts: 367
Joined: Sun Jun 29, 2008 8:00 am

Re: Mercury Updates

Unread postby StevenJay » Sat Oct 03, 2009 2:33 am

Anaconda wrote:There is other evidence besides radiocarbon dating that suggests the Earth is older than 50,000 years old.


The dizzying array of flora and fauna, for instance... :?
It's all about perception.
User avatar
StevenJay
 
Posts: 506
Joined: Thu May 01, 2008 11:02 am
Location: Northern Arizona

Re: Mercury Updates

Unread postby kmcook » Sat Oct 03, 2009 7:11 pm

Picture has image of Mars labelled as Mercury.
kmcook
 
Posts: 19
Joined: Mon Mar 31, 2008 6:20 pm
Location: Australia

Re: Mercury Updates

Unread postby StevenJay » Sat Oct 03, 2009 7:50 pm

kmcook wrote:Picture has image of Mars labelled as Mercury.

Heh, ya know, when I was searching for the highest quality images to use, the first thing I thought was, Hey, that looks suspciously like Valles Marineris! But, as I kept searching it kept coming up from several different sources as a Mercury image - some of them "official." So, I thought that perhaps there's a similar geographical scar on Mercury. That's what I get for thinking. :oops:

So, if one of our fine hall monitors would be so kind as to remove that post, I'll be glad to make the proper changes. . . or maybe just let it go altogether? :)
It's all about perception.
User avatar
StevenJay
 
Posts: 506
Joined: Thu May 01, 2008 11:02 am
Location: Northern Arizona

Re: Mercury Updates

Unread postby mharratsc » Mon Oct 05, 2009 12:42 pm

There is other evidence besides radiocarbon dating that suggests the Earth is older than 50,000 years old.


Umm... the way I understand it, 10,000 years ago was the Saturn-Solar cataclysm that rearranged two solar systems into the current configuration that we have now, and was NOT the birthdate of the Earth.

If such were the case, we were created right at the time of the planet, looked up in the sky with fully formed brains and language already programmed in, squatted down and immediately started chiselling what we saw in the sky onto rocks all across the planet! :P

Mike H.
Mike H.

"I have no fear to shout out my ignorance and let the Wise correct me, for every instance of such narrows the gulf between them and me." -- Michael A. Harrington
mharratsc
 
Posts: 1405
Joined: Mon Jan 26, 2009 7:37 am

Re: EDM on Mercury caught by MESSENGER

Unread postby mharratsc » Mon Oct 05, 2009 1:19 pm

Looking at the close up image of the crater, it seems to me that there is a wisp of something, and it is NOT emanating from the crater, but rather from the bright white spot on the rim closest to the camera. Likewise, there appear to be two smaller wisps off the right of the larger one. The smallest of the three seems to be two small tendrils that are meeting up towards the very edge of the rim of the crater, perhaps even merging or wrapping each other at that point. The second largest wisp, farther right from there, seems to be rather diffuse.

You may not want to call it EDM, but it certainly looks to me that there are wisps of something rising up from the surface, that they are at least backlit by sunlight. By contrast to the dust devil image with the contrast manipulation- if the Mercurian image were similar, wouldn't the white wisps visible against the black crater then have a darker aspect against the lighter surface area above the crater?

I dunno. I'm very visual, and I think there is difinitely something coming up off the surface in that picture. If not EDM, then it would have to be something sublimating in the extreme heat? In any event, I find it striking that the 'wispy' whatevers are coming from the brightest spots on the photo.

I definitely think that photo is showing something actually occurring, in any event!

***Disclaimer- nothing that I say can be taken as gospel due to my complete lack of scientific training. I'm am simply very opinionated. :P ***


Mike H.
Mike H.

"I have no fear to shout out my ignorance and let the Wise correct me, for every instance of such narrows the gulf between them and me." -- Michael A. Harrington
mharratsc
 
Posts: 1405
Joined: Mon Jan 26, 2009 7:37 am

PreviousNext

Return to Electric Universe - Planetary Science

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests