'Welease Wosetta!'

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: 'Welease Wosetta!'

Unread postby paladin17 » Sun Jun 14, 2015 4:36 pm

I was reviewing their presentations on Rosetta pretty carefully in my blog (it's in Russian, so I wouldn't give any links), - J.-P. Bibring said at the AGU conference in December that Philae's gonna reawake in February-March. It is interesting, in my opinion, that it took 3-4 months more for this to actually happen. Something was wrong with their estimates.
Maybe 67P brightness doesn't behave the way they thought it would be?
User avatar
paladin17
 
Posts: 150
Joined: Mon Jul 14, 2014 7:47 am
Location: Minsk, Belarus

Re: 'Welease Wosetta!'

Unread postby Frantic » Mon Jun 15, 2015 4:55 pm

http://www.space.com/29672-rosetta-comet-eruptions-surprising-discovery.html?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+spaceheadlines+%28SPACE.com+Headline+Feed%29

Article Titled "Charged Particles Play Surprising Role in Comet's Eruptions"

Electrons cause the rapid breakup of water and carbon dioxide molecules erupting from the surface of comet 67P/Churyumov-Gerasimenko, new findings reveal.


What findings prove that the molecule is ionized by a photon, and an electron bounce into another molecule? Is that the only possible conclusion from the data? In their model, photons ionize CO2 and H2O, free electrons collide with these particles and generate emissions detected by ALICE.

Are collisions a reasonable theory in the cometary environment to produce the emissions?

So the brightest points on the spectral image, seem to be the Ly Alpha and Beta, which they then correlate to water, is it coincidence they linked the brightest bands to water? Or is that a Valid assumption? So water levels and brightness should both be increasing as we head toward the sun.

Is it new for them to admit the sun is ionizing the comet's atmosphere? Once sufficient ionization occurs, a lot of electric comet predictions begin to make sense, right?

Why not involve the other compounds such as hydrocarbons and nitrogens?

Anyway, interesting, can't wait to hear more in the future.
Frantic
 
Posts: 255
Joined: Tue Nov 26, 2013 8:49 am

Re: 'Welease Wosetta!'

Unread postby Frantic » Mon Jun 15, 2015 7:17 pm

So with the ideas Viscount and I have bounced around, I think we have identified the nucleus as a source of electrons, they are being liberated from the surface materials by an induced charge from the comet's ionosphere, producing selective corrosion of the materials with lowest ionization potential. There should be an obvious difference between an ice ejection model and an electron liberation model. As the comet approaches the sun, the double layer will elongate and expand there will be increase concentration of solar wind and consequentially will increase the concentration of the material being liberated from the comet as well. I would expect so see a lot of jet activity and not much water.

To clear some confusions, Olivine is simply Magnesium and Iron Silicate. No hydration.

The serpentinite group minerals is where we begin talking about hydrated rocks. Serpentinite minerals can contain large volumes of water.

Pyroxenes are more complex minerals, containing, Lithium, Sodium, Calcium, Aluminum Silicate, and Olivine

67P was most likely a combination of pyroxenes and serpentinites. I am not convinced the water of hydration could have survived the process that sent this rock into orbit. So if I rule out Serpentinite, and I look at the lowest ionization potential material in Pyroxenes, then, the selective corrosion of the alkalai/alkaline and aluminum in the pyroxenes, could have created the bizarre shape of the comet. But basically, it doesn't matter which silicate you start with, the highest ionization potential materials will remain, and that is the olivine. So it may be correct to say It is a flying chunk of olivine. Hmmm.... or will it be Fried Ice Cream... Mmmm Fried Ice Cream....
Frantic
 
Posts: 255
Joined: Tue Nov 26, 2013 8:49 am

Re: 'Welease Wosetta!'

Unread postby D_Archer » Tue Jun 16, 2015 1:44 am

Frantic wrote:So the brightest points on the spectral image, seem to be the Ly Alpha and Beta, which they then correlate to water, is it coincidence they linked the brightest bands to water? Or is that a Valid assumption? So water levels and brightness should both be increasing as we head toward the sun.


Water is still only an assumption, not directly detected. It is valid for a dirty snowball theory but not really EU i think. But anything is possible in a rock but i would still not bet on it. H emissions should increase and since this is electron interaction, brightness should increase as well, but may not be at the point they expect, more after the closer approach probably.


Is it new for them to admit the sun is ionizing the comet's atmosphere? Once sufficient ionization occurs, a lot of electric comet predictions begin to make sense, right?


Yes, that is new for them, they always claimed heating via solar photons (infrared), not ionic interactions with the solar wind that is a specific EU prediction/claim. EU always makes sense :)

Why not involve the other compounds such as hydrocarbons and nitrogens?


Dunno

Frantic wrote:So with the ideas Viscount and I have bounced around, I think we have identified the nucleus as a source of electrons, they are being liberated from the surface materials by an induced charge from the comet's ionosphere, producing selective corrosion of the materials with lowest ionization potential. There should be an obvious difference between an ice ejection model and an electron liberation model. As the comet approaches the sun, the double layer will elongate and expand there will be increase concentration of solar wind and consequentially will increase the concentration of the material being liberated from the comet as well. I would expect so see a lot of jet activity and not much water.


Yes, more jetting, more surface erosion.

To clear some confusions, Olivine is simply Magnesium and Iron Silicate. No hydration.

The serpentinite group minerals is where we begin talking about hydrated rocks. Serpentinite minerals can contain large volumes of water.

Pyroxenes are more complex minerals, containing, Lithium, Sodium, Calcium, Aluminum Silicate, and Olivine

67P was most likely a combination of pyroxenes and serpentinites. I am not convinced the water of hydration could have survived the process that sent this rock into orbit.


Why exactly?, i tried to find more about water in hydrate but most is about chem classes to determine the water content, not its formation process... crystallization in a violent process..?

So if I rule out Serpentinite, and I look at the lowest ionization potential material in Pyroxenes, then, the selective corrosion of the alkalai/alkaline and aluminum in the pyroxenes, could have created the bizarre shape of the comet. But basically, it doesn't matter which silicate you start with, the highest ionization potential materials will remain, and that is the olivine. So it may be correct to say It is a flying chunk of olivine. Hmmm.... or will it be Fried Ice Cream... Mmmm Fried Ice Cream....


Mmm indeed.

Regards,
Daniel
- Shoot Forth Thunder -
User avatar
D_Archer
 
Posts: 1255
Joined: Sat Apr 18, 2009 4:01 am
Location: The Netherlands

Re: 'Welease Wosetta!'

Unread postby seasmith » Tue Jun 16, 2015 9:21 am

Is it new for them to admit the sun is ionizing the comet's atmosphere ?


This was brought forward by Prof Glassmeier, when explaining the "Singing Comet", at the EGU press con in April 15, 2015
(around min 14:30 on video, never did find a free transcript)

http://client.cntv.at/egu2015/PC1


Some discussion here:
viewtopic.php?f=3&t=15466&p=105252#p105252


Singing Comet 4-2015.jpg
seasmith
 
Posts: 2815
Joined: Thu Mar 27, 2008 6:59 pm

Re: 'Welease Wosetta!'

Unread postby Frantic » Tue Jun 16, 2015 4:58 pm

D_Archer wrote:Why exactly?, i tried to find more about water in hydrate but most is about chem classes to determine the water content, not its formation process... crystallization in a violent process..?


The serpentine group describes a group of common rock-forming hydrous magnesium iron phyllosilicate ((Mg, Fe)3Si2O5(OH)4) minerals; they may contain minor amounts of other elements including chromium, manganese, cobalt or nickel. In mineralogy and gemology, serpentine may refer to any of 20 varieties belonging to the serpentine group. Owing to admixture, these varieties are not always easy to individualize, and distinctions are not usually made. There are three important mineral polymorphs of serpentine: antigorite, chrysotile and lizardite.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Serpentinite
You can find information on the reactions and compositions at that wiki page.
Frantic
 
Posts: 255
Joined: Tue Nov 26, 2013 8:49 am

Re: 'Welease Wosetta!'

Unread postby Frantic » Wed Jun 17, 2015 4:57 pm

Daniel, the process of serpentinization is not violent necessarily. I was imagining some kind of magma ejection event and so I was thinking more of that composition, where as serpentinite would likely needed to have formed through planetary processes and than ejected out in a more solid form....not sure, the origin of 67P is not understood and I am just taking stabs in the dark. I don't have a reputation or any pride to worry about, so I throw ideas around.

Happened onto this old info Steve Smith just posted. This may seem off topic but I think there is a relation to comets.

One of Saturn's moons, Phoebe, orbits within the new ring and is, itself, circling its parent in a retrograde orbit. Some scientists speculate that the ring is generated from Phoebe as its surface ices are eroded by impacts over millions of years.

Phoebe is another tiny moon, 220 kilometers in diameter, half the size of Enceladus. Its gravitational acceleration is a mere .05 meters per second squared. The majority of Saturn's other moons are highly reflective of visible light, but Phoebe is as black as coal, making it one of the darkest objects in the Solar System. NASA scientists describe Phoebe as "very strange" and probably a captured moon.


I just don't think the ideas here of erosion and dark as coal can be coincidences when compared to 67P. There has to be a reason that these objects exposed to the solar wind shed material and turn black. The other moons are perhaps closer to the saturn atmosphere and rotating close to the solar plane and are shielded by saturn itself more often than phoebe.
Frantic
 
Posts: 255
Joined: Tue Nov 26, 2013 8:49 am

Re: 'Welease Wosetta!'

Unread postby D_Archer » Thu Jun 18, 2015 2:58 am

Frantic wrote:Daniel, the process of serpentinization is not violent necessarily. I was imagining some kind of magma ejection event and so I was thinking more of that composition, where as serpentinite would likely needed to have formed through planetary processes and than ejected out in a more solid form....not sure, the origin of 67P is not understood and I am just taking stabs in the dark. I don't have a reputation or any pride to worry about, so I throw ideas around.

Happened onto this old info Steve Smith just posted. This may seem off topic but I think there is a relation to comets.

One of Saturn's moons, Phoebe, orbits within the new ring and is, itself, circling its parent in a retrograde orbit. Some scientists speculate that the ring is generated from Phoebe as its surface ices are eroded by impacts over millions of years.

Phoebe is another tiny moon, 220 kilometers in diameter, half the size of Enceladus. Its gravitational acceleration is a mere .05 meters per second squared. The majority of Saturn's other moons are highly reflective of visible light, but Phoebe is as black as coal, making it one of the darkest objects in the Solar System. NASA scientists describe Phoebe as "very strange" and probably a captured moon.


I just don't think the ideas here of erosion and dark as coal can be coincidences when compared to 67P. There has to be a reason that these objects exposed to the solar wind shed material and turn black. The other moons are perhaps closer to the saturn atmosphere and rotating close to the solar plane and are shielded by saturn itself more often than phoebe.


The origin of the asteroid should be violent but yes the serpentine is from magma process, i read it is just formed when magma meets water and depending on the pressures different type of crystallized rock are created.

I would venture as does EU that the material of comets is actual planet mantle. There would have to be a theory of from how deep a discharge could excavate material, the larger bodies would be from the most violent discharges that penetrate the deepest. Valles Marineres would be evidence of such an event.

Large chunks would be launched into space 'whole', i think the rock would only ionize at the surface for a while, creating a plasma sheath, thus protecting the mantle rock from destruction then and there. Depending on location of excavation and energy such an event could create all the type of asteroids we know of.

I am just taking stabs as well, as laymen i think that is our job :D

Regards,
Daniel
- Shoot Forth Thunder -
User avatar
D_Archer
 
Posts: 1255
Joined: Sat Apr 18, 2009 4:01 am
Location: The Netherlands

Re: 'Welease Wosetta!'

Unread postby D_Archer » Sat Jun 20, 2015 4:34 am

Rosetta Continues to Shatter Dirty Snowball Myth | Space News:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OM3ZrUlrx7E

Wal: Water is just an assumption. (not a quote)

And in more detail >
Electrochemistry on Comet 67P | Space News:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MSuVYN1nXx4

Franklin Anariba: "It is questionable to assume that the atomic emission lines are associated with parent molecules such as water, and carbon dioxide"

Rgards,
Daniel
- Shoot Forth Thunder -
User avatar
D_Archer
 
Posts: 1255
Joined: Sat Apr 18, 2009 4:01 am
Location: The Netherlands

Re: 'Welease Wosetta!'

Unread postby seasmith » Mon Jun 22, 2015 7:34 pm

aura borealis

Image

"We found the highest density of water just above the neck, close to the north pole of the comet's rotation axis: in this narrow region, the column density of water is up to two orders of magnitude higher than elsewhere in the coma," adds Dr Biver.

Lower but still substantial amounts of water are detected over the day side of the nucleus up to the terminator between the illuminated and dark side. The lowest amounts of water are found on the comet's night side – particularly over the southern polar regions; these could be due to either local outgassing or circulation effects within the coma, causing water to flow from the day to the night side.


What if 67P, like Earth, a body progressing and Spinning on its polar axis through the IMF, is receiving a majority of solar energy via its North Pole , and thus emmitting there more radicals such as O, H, and HO at the North and sunlit sides ,
and hence fewer emissions at the South and dark faces ?
(No terrestrial magnotail here)


"MIRO MAPS WATER IN COMET'S COMA"
http://sci.esa.int/rosetta/56065-miro-m ... mets-coma/
seasmith
 
Posts: 2815
Joined: Thu Mar 27, 2008 6:59 pm

Re: 'Welease Wosetta!'

Unread postby D_Archer » Tue Jun 23, 2015 1:15 am

seasmith wrote: What if 67P, like Earth, a body progressing and Spinning on its polar axis through the IMF, is receiving a majority of solar energy via its North Pole , and thus emmitting there more radicals such as O, H, and HO at the North and sunlit sides ,
and hence fewer emissions at the South and dark faces ?
(No terrestrial magnotail here)


Yes, that would be logical. In any case you can also just count the direct solar wind direction upon the body proper and where electrons arrive first at the surface and ions later recombine that is where the activity occurs, so it is sort of a direct interaction.

Could someone more technical than me get the actual MIRO data, to review it. I read a paper once that where they assume the H-lines are from water, but i think they are misusing the the term 'water' to suit their needs. These are not H20 spectra, their theory of spectra demands it to be water, not the actual data.

Regards,
Daniel
- Shoot Forth Thunder -
User avatar
D_Archer
 
Posts: 1255
Joined: Sat Apr 18, 2009 4:01 am
Location: The Netherlands

Re: 'Welease Wosetta!'

Unread postby Frantic » Tue Jun 23, 2015 10:22 am

Yes, they say water, but they mean energy.

Good point Seasmith, I think my idea of round bodies kept me from thinking of a northpole occurring over the neck region, what you say makes a lot of sense in the observations we are seeing.

And Daniel, if there is a great concentration of ions at the northpole, would that not be the location of the most recombination and hence the most "water " detection?
Frantic
 
Posts: 255
Joined: Tue Nov 26, 2013 8:49 am

Re: 'Welease Wosetta!'

Unread postby D_Archer » Tue Jun 23, 2015 10:50 am

Frantic wrote:And Daniel, if there is a great concentration of ions at the northpole, would that not be the location of the most recombination and hence the most "water " detection?


Yes, that would follow, the greatest concentration pointed towards the sun on the day side, i am not sure if that is the north pole of the asteroid. But it looks like it is, the bright spot in the following image would be the north pole?

Image

Regards,
Daniel
- Shoot Forth Thunder -
User avatar
D_Archer
 
Posts: 1255
Joined: Sat Apr 18, 2009 4:01 am
Location: The Netherlands

Re: 'Welease Wosetta!'

Unread postby seasmith » Tue Jun 23, 2015 1:34 pm

Just to be redudntººº

I think as you say, the bright spot (and arrow with circle) would be north pole.
The article talks about north pole And day side as being most active.
67P is said to have an inclination-to-ecliptic of 7º (Earth ~23º), so "day side" is ~80º from "north pole". That is why with the picture, i mentioned Aura Borealis.

Not really, but with a charged body Spinning, and traveling through an IMF, there's a possibility imo for polar oriented flows, perhaps in addition to day/night transitions.
Just a "what if"...

http://www.heavens-above.com/comet.aspx ... 5&tz=MALST
seasmith
 
Posts: 2815
Joined: Thu Mar 27, 2008 6:59 pm

Re: 'Welease Wosetta!'

Unread postby Regulus » Tue Jun 23, 2015 8:53 pm

Just a comment on mission cameras and their returns.
Malin Space Science, owned my the Australian, David Malin, often has 'there' camera's on board on missions as private science contractors. But because it is 'private enterprise' it allows the images to be kept, and stored, for long periods of time before release to the public. If ever. It's a clever work around that NASA started using so that the visual information can be kept from the public, given that they are ostensibly a government body with obligations to the American public, this was a way to hold on to the info.

Trevor
Couer de Leon
User avatar
Regulus
 
Posts: 21
Joined: Wed Oct 22, 2014 9:25 am
Location: Devonport, Tasmania Aust

PreviousNext

Return to Electric Universe - Planetary Science

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 30 guests