Electrical nature of comets will dismantle "Oort Cloud"

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: bboyer, MGmirkin

Locked
User avatar
viscount aero
Posts: 2381
Joined: Mon May 12, 2008 11:23 pm
Location: Los Angeles, California
Contact:

Electrical nature of comets will dismantle "Oort Cloud"

Unread post by viscount aero » Sat Aug 30, 2014 12:03 am

Another theory must fall: The so-called Oort Cloud.

This far-fetched theory, to my knowledge, was predicated and hung on the entire idea of the comets absolutely being icy dirt balls, borne on far-flung trajectories that somehow originated in a light-year [thereabouts] distant place--the Oort Cloud--a frozen netherworld surrounding the solar system very much like the heliosheath. But no such structure has ever been observed directly or even indirectly. But this is just the beginning.

Here is a brief account of the Oort Cloud's origins as a theory:

from:
https://www.universeguide.com/fact/oortcloud

"Oort Cloud
Introduction, What is the Oort Cloud?

The Oort Cloud in brief is an hypothesized area in space that is estimated to be located be roughly one light year away from the Sun. To put some more context into the description, the nearest star Proxima Centauri is four times further away than the Oort Cloud. It is a region of space where Comets are believed to originate from. There has been no definate evidence that the Oort Cloud exists. There is a debate currently raging as to whether Sedna, the so-called "Tenth Planet" is actually part of an inner Oort Cloud. This is because the Oort Cloud is three times further away from the Sun than Pluto, well beyond where the Kuiper Belt is said to inhabit. Oort Cloud objects are too far away for our telescopes on Earth to see any of these objects, plus you also need to take into account the fact that they are very small. Thousands upon millions of comets are believed to be "holding up" in the Oort Cloud, waiting to be sent on a journey to the Sun. They are not clustered in one area of the galaxy but surround the entire solar system like a cloud.

The Oort Cloud is named after Jan Hendrik Oort ( Apr 28, 1900 - Nov 5, 1992 ) who predicted them where they are widely believed to be nowadays.
Before Oort, Ernst Opik, who in 1932, an Estonian Astronomer had placed the cloud just outside the solar system. The Oort Cloud is sometimes known as the Opik-Ort Cloud in recognition of the earlier hypothesis. Oort bases his cloud theory on :-

-- No comet''''s path has been calculated to indicate as coming from interstellar space.
-- All comets so far seen don''''t all seem to be coming from the one point in space.
-- There is a strong belief that many comets furthest point from the Sun lies around 50,000 A.U., roughly 1 Light Year or 50,000 times the distance between Earth and the Sun.

Apart from being associated with the Oort Cloud, Jan also calculated that the centre of the Milky Way is 30,000 light years away in the direction of the Sagittarius constellation. The below pictures show where the Cloud is located in comparison to the rest of the solar system. The Oort cloud is the blueish ring in the bottom left picture.

The Oort Cloud is believed to have been created five billion years ago when a nebula exploded, creating the Sun and its planets. The intense gravitational strength of Jupiter is said to have pushed them to the outer regions of space.

What is the difference between the Asteroid Belt, Kuiper Belt and Oort Cloud?

The main difference between the three is location, the Asteroid Belt is located between the orbits of Mars and Jupiter. They are believed to have been parts of a planets that failed to form because of the immense gravity of Jupiter. The asteroids are small rocky planetoids. In recent years, Ceres, a near spherical planetoid was elevated to dwarf planet status by the International Astronomical Union, the worlds governing body for all things space.

At the edge of the solar system, beyond the planet Neptune is the Kuiper Belt which contains a large number of asteroids. The planet Pluto is in this region of space. It used to be known as a planet but it was downgraded when other objects such as Eris was found in that region of space and was deemed to be larger than Pluto.

As mentioned before, the Oort Cloud is estimated to be about a light year away from the Sun. Unlike the two belts, the contents of the Oort Cloud is dirty ice balls, comets that get knocked out of their current location and come on a journey to the Sun. There is evidence that the Asteroid Belt and the Kuiper Belt exist, but because the Oort Cloud is so far away and the objects are so small, the Oort Cloud will remain a theory for some time. It''''ll be a long time before Voyager 2 satellite reaches the Oort Cloud and by that time you and me won''''t be around and Voyager 2 will have run out of energy so will not be able to send any signals back."

----------
Several things are wrong with the Oort Cloud's alleged existence.

What are some things that you can locate in the above article that equivocate to red-herring status? What are some of the erroneous things postulated in the theory that are far-fetched even by classical physics standards?

User avatar
Metryq
Posts: 513
Joined: Mon Dec 03, 2012 3:31 am

Re: Electrical nature of comets will dismantle "Oort Cloud"

Unread post by Metryq » Sat Aug 30, 2014 3:15 am

viscount aero wrote:from:
https://www.universeguide.com/fact/oortcloud

The planet Pluto is in this region of space. It used to be known as a planet but it was downgraded when other objects such as Eris was found in that region of space and was deemed to be larger than Pluto.
I've run into many people who put up a huge fuss over Pluto being "downgraded" to a dwarf planet, insisting that they will always consider it a planet because "that's the way I learned it as a kid." That dogmatic attitude will serve them well if they decide to become establishment astronomers. (I'd call the reclassification of Pluto a good thing, as then Holst's THE PLANETS is no longer missing a movement.)
What are some things that you can locate in the above article that equivocate to red-herring status? What are some of the erroneous things postulated in the theory that are far-fetched even by classical physics standards?
Well, not mentioned in the article above, but I've read elsewhere that part of the reason for the invention of the mythical Oort cloud is that comets—evaporating a little each time they pass the Sun—could not have lasted as long as the Solar system. So a reservoir is needed.

The Oort cloud also dovetails with the nebular hypothesis—rocky worlds close in, and Jovians farther out. The cold outer reaches of the system are the only place bodies imagined to be made largely of volatiles could exist. The EU view is that comets and "asteroids" are really the same kind of animal. In these forums there's been mention of high eccentricity asteroids showing EDM and minor coma formation—which makes me wonder if the asteroids could be used to date the "arrival of Saturn." Will the Solar system eventually be swept clean of all the minor debris, given time?

(And it's interesting that Pluto was "downgraded" over a rule based on the nebular hypothesis—sweeping out its orbit of other bodies.)

The asteroid belt and the Kuiper belt may turn out to be the wreckage of "purple dawn" planets that used to exist, or at least debris from those that still exist, rather than planets that failed to form. But that is still speculative.

User avatar
Solar
Posts: 1372
Joined: Mon Mar 17, 2008 3:05 am

Re: Electrical nature of comets will dismantle "Oort Cloud"

Unread post by Solar » Sat Aug 30, 2014 4:53 am

viscount aero wrote:Another theory must fall: The so-called Oort Cloud.

(...)

Several things are wrong with the Oort Cloud's alleged existence.

What are some things that you can locate in the above article that equivocate to red-herring status? What are some of the erroneous things postulated in the theory that are far-fetched even by classical physics standards?
Well:

A couple of other things that would seem to have alarm bells ringing about the supposed Oort Cloud is that to date no such spherical ‘haze’ of this fictitious creature has been resolved around any star throughout the history of astronomy. Such a thing should’ve been detected along with stellar “debris disc”, stellar “bubbles”, the resolution of a supposed 1800 “exoplanets” some of which the orbits thereof can be followed (Exoplanet caught on the move) etc. The structure of this Oort should have popped up around other stars dimming stellar light and throwing standard candles out of the window a multitude of times so very long ago as to be absurd. In my humble mind such a light dimming ‘haze’ of planetesimals and potential stellar Oort clouds would be the last thing astrophysics would want to find this late in the game; luminosity/brightness calcs would be wrong wouldn't they?
"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

celeste
Posts: 821
Joined: Mon Apr 11, 2011 7:41 pm
Location: Scottsdale, Arizona

Re: Electrical nature of comets will dismantle "Oort Cloud"

Unread post by celeste » Sat Aug 30, 2014 11:04 am

I think it may be useful to start with some of Tom Van Flandern's ideas, and add in what we know from EU.

We all agree that comets get "used up" over time. They can burn up, crash into the sun/planets, or be ejected from the solar system completely. If comets were left over from the solar system formation, the question was "why were they not all used up by now?" The mainstream solution, of course, was to posit the Oort cloud, as a source of replenishment.

Van Flandern argued that if a planet in our solar system (where we see the asteroid belt) exploded fairly recently in solar system history, that would explain cometary and asteroid orbits. The pieces of our "missing" planet that are left in circular orbits, are stable (asteroid belt). The pieces in highly elliptical orbits (comets) have not made many returns to the inner solar system to get "used up". Only the intermediate orbits would have been swept up by now. This leaves us with a picture of comets that fits well with EU. They are not dirty snowballs, but the same kind of rocks that compose the asteroid belt.

What Tom Van Flandern suggested for the mechanism of planetary explosion, was that radiation from outside, could have heated up the planet, until it exploded. Here, I think, is where we should step in with some EU ideas.

I've argued that stable planetary orbits (Bode's law), can be explained by saying that planets must obey gravitational orbits,and also follow magnetic field lines (assuming our solar system is in a filament as described by Donald Scott). I won't ask you to accept that, but merely consider what would happen IF a planet was following along some background magnetic field, and then perturbed into a path which spiraled along the magnetic field. Wouldn't it radiate energy? If we could successfully radiate energy away fast enough, we'd have a planet that "gives off more heat than it gets from the sun". If we can't radiate energy away fast enough, wouldn't that cause the planet to explode?

User avatar
viscount aero
Posts: 2381
Joined: Mon May 12, 2008 11:23 pm
Location: Los Angeles, California
Contact:

Re: Electrical nature of comets will dismantle "Oort Cloud"

Unread post by viscount aero » Sat Aug 30, 2014 11:40 am

Metryq, great post. My replies follow in BLUE:
Metryq wrote:
viscount aero wrote:from:
https://www.universeguide.com/fact/oortcloud

The planet Pluto is in this region of space. It used to be known as a planet but it was downgraded when other objects such as Eris was found in that region of space and was deemed to be larger than Pluto.
I've run into many people who put up a huge fuss over Pluto being "downgraded" to a dwarf planet, insisting that they will always consider it a planet because "that's the way I learned it as a kid." That dogmatic attitude will serve them well if they decide to become establishment astronomers. (I'd call the reclassification of Pluto a good thing, as then Holst's THE PLANETS is no longer missing a movement.)

I agree, good point. To add, even as a minor planet or planetoid that increases the solar system's number of planets, not decreases them. So the sour grapes dogma is further meaningless.
What are some things that you can locate in the above article that equivocate to red-herring status? What are some of the erroneous things postulated in the theory that are far-fetched even by classical physics standards?
Well, not mentioned in the article above, but I've read elsewhere that part of the reason for the invention of the mythical Oort cloud is that comets—evaporating a little each time they pass the Sun—could not have lasted as long as the Solar system. So a reservoir is needed.

Exactly and great clarification. The Oort Cloud is largely--if not only--"icy cometary model" based. You take away the icy dirtball comet [which is being disproven year to year as more probes visit comets] the Oort Cloud no longer needs to exist. The Oort Cloud is a cloud of nothing.


The Oort cloud also dovetails with the nebular hypothesis—rocky worlds close in, and Jovians farther out. The cold outer reaches of the system are the only place bodies imagined to be made largely of volatiles could exist. The EU view is that comets and "asteroids" are really the same kind of animal. In these forums there's been mention of high eccentricity asteroids showing EDM and minor coma formation—which makes me wonder if the asteroids could be used to date the "arrival of Saturn." Will the Solar system eventually be swept clean of all the minor debris, given time?

Bingo again. But you then take away core accretion theory--which has been categorically disproven by data http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/ ... ffled.html --and the Oort Cloud vanishes with the fiction of the nebular collapse. In short order, the entire establishment model for solar system evolution has been disproven.

to wit:

Scientists have NO idea how planets form: Discovery of hundreds of new worlds has left experts baffled

• Astronomers are being forced to rewrite their theories of planet formation
• Washington DC-based Nasa and others are struggling to explain them
• Previously it was thought our solar system was a model of other systems
• But the discovery of bizarre planets in odd orbits has challenged theories
• Some huge planets are in tight orbits that defy our current laws of planets
• Lots of other systems also have super-Earths, but our system has none
• The discovery of these new planets is leading astronomers to change tack

^^^ But despite the above criteria the core accretion theory is stilll taught, is still written into magazines and press releases, and it is still purported to be a viable modern theory!
:o


(And it's interesting that Pluto was "downgraded" over a rule based on the nebular hypothesis—sweeping out its orbit of other bodies.)

The asteroid belt and the Kuiper belt may turn out to be the wreckage of "purple dawn" planets that used to exist, or at least debris from those that still exist, rather than planets that failed to form. But that is still speculative.

And again no causal agency is ever held accountable for things being "swept out." That idea is just accepted like a group of people playing "Simon Says."

User avatar
viscount aero
Posts: 2381
Joined: Mon May 12, 2008 11:23 pm
Location: Los Angeles, California
Contact:

Re: Electrical nature of comets will dismantle "Oort Cloud"

Unread post by viscount aero » Sat Aug 30, 2014 11:52 am

Solar wrote:
viscount aero wrote:Another theory must fall: The so-called Oort Cloud.

(...)

Several things are wrong with the Oort Cloud's alleged existence.

What are some things that you can locate in the above article that equivocate to red-herring status? What are some of the erroneous things postulated in the theory that are far-fetched even by classical physics standards?
Well:

A couple of other things that would seem to have alarm bells ringing about the supposed Oort Cloud is that to date no such spherical ‘haze’ of this fictitious creature has been resolved around any star throughout the history of astronomy. Such a thing should’ve been detected along with stellar “debris disc”, stellar “bubbles”, the resolution of a supposed 1800 “exoplanets” some of which the orbits thereof can be followed (Exoplanet caught on the move) etc. The structure of this Oort should have popped up around other stars dimming stellar light and throwing standard candles out of the window a multitude of times so very long ago as to be absurd. In my humble mind such a light dimming ‘haze’ of planetesimals and potential stellar Oort clouds would be the last thing astrophysics would want to find this late in the game; luminosity/brightness calcs would be wrong wouldn't they?
Yes you are right :o :idea:

No accountability for extrasolar Oort Cloud structures has ever been asserted, observed, or calculated to exist! So it only exists with our solar system? :roll: And as the Oort Cloud theory exists because it sought to remedy the comet problem--comets only exist in our solar system? :roll:

User avatar
viscount aero
Posts: 2381
Joined: Mon May 12, 2008 11:23 pm
Location: Los Angeles, California
Contact:

Re: Electrical nature of comets will dismantle "Oort Cloud"

Unread post by viscount aero » Sat Aug 30, 2014 11:58 am

Celeste, great post. My replies are in BLUE:
celeste wrote:I think it may be useful to start with some of Tom Van Flandern's ideas, and add in what we know from EU.

We all agree that comets get "used up" over time. They can burn up, crash into the sun/planets, or be ejected from the solar system completely. If comets were left over from the solar system formation, the question was "why were they not all used up by now?" The mainstream solution, of course, was to posit the Oort cloud, as a source of replenishment.

That's correct.

Van Flandern argued that if a planet in our solar system (where we see the asteroid belt) exploded fairly recently in solar system history, that would explain cometary and asteroid orbits. The pieces of our "missing" planet that are left in circular orbits, are stable (asteroid belt). The pieces in highly elliptical orbits (comets) have not made many returns to the inner solar system to get "used up". Only the intermediate orbits would have been swept up by now. This leaves us with a picture of comets that fits well with EU. They are not dirty snowballs, but the same kind of rocks that compose the asteroid belt.

Probably yes.


What Tom Van Flandern suggested for the mechanism of planetary explosion, was that radiation from outside, could have heated up the planet, until it exploded. Here, I think, is where we should step in with some EU ideas.

I've argued that stable planetary orbits (Bode's law), can be explained by saying that planets must obey gravitational orbits,and also follow magnetic field lines (assuming our solar system is in a filament as described by Donald Scott). I won't ask you to accept that, but merely consider what would happen IF a planet was following along some background magnetic field, and then perturbed into a path which spiraled along the magnetic field. Wouldn't it radiate energy? If we could successfully radiate energy away fast enough, we'd have a planet that "gives off more heat than it gets from the sun". If we can't radiate energy away fast enough, wouldn't that cause the planet to explode?

Very possibly. Consider that all of the Jovian planets give off more heat than they get from the sun.

+EyeOn-W-ANeed2Know
Posts: 165
Joined: Sun Dec 12, 2010 11:41 pm

Re: Electrical nature of comets will dismantle "Oort Cloud"

Unread post by +EyeOn-W-ANeed2Know » Thu Sep 04, 2014 9:20 pm

The Oort Cloud is believed to have been created five billion years ago when a nebula exploded, creating the Sun and its planets. The intense gravitational strength of Jupiter is said to have pushed them to the outer regions of space.
Hmmm it musta been a small Nebula...

I'ma guessin it's cuz I ain't one of them there professional Astrophysicistical, but I'd love if any of those fellas could demonstrate how an unrestricted (outward) explosive force in a cloud of gases creates multiple orbiting spherical solids...

While they're at it, I wouldn't mind them explaining how ONE sphere gets to gravitationally "push" highly selective materials...

LOL! Well it's not as artistically creative, but it is just as logical as saying
"One day some the gods were playing with the sky ices, when an errant toss landed in Jupiter's wine. He became so enraged that his drink had been sullied, that he decreed that all the dirty snowballs be banished beyond the outer limits of the kingdom".

User avatar
Bomb20
Posts: 176
Joined: Sun Sep 01, 2013 7:16 pm
Location: Germany

Re: Electrical nature of comets will dismantle "Oort Cloud"

Unread post by Bomb20 » Thu Sep 04, 2014 11:57 pm

The Oort Cloud is believed to have been created five billion years ago when a nebula exploded, creating the Sun and its planets. The intense gravitational strength of Jupiter is said to have pushed them to the outer regions of space.
I always wonder how they are making gravitational forces to a pushing force if needed? Why did Jupiter not attract everything around?

User avatar
viscount aero
Posts: 2381
Joined: Mon May 12, 2008 11:23 pm
Location: Los Angeles, California
Contact:

Re: Electrical nature of comets will dismantle "Oort Cloud"

Unread post by viscount aero » Sat Sep 06, 2014 10:40 am

+EyeOn-W-ANeed2Know wrote:
The Oort Cloud is believed to have been created five billion years ago when a nebula exploded, creating the Sun and its planets. The intense gravitational strength of Jupiter is said to have pushed them to the outer regions of space.
Hmmm it musta been a small Nebula...

I'ma guessin it's cuz I ain't one of them there professional Astrophysicistical, but I'd love if any of those fellas could demonstrate how an unrestricted (outward) explosive force in a cloud of gases creates multiple orbiting spherical solids...

While they're at it, I wouldn't mind them explaining how ONE sphere gets to gravitationally "push" highly selective materials...


LOL! Well it's not as artistically creative, but it is just as logical as saying
"One day some the gods were playing with the sky ices, when an errant toss landed in Jupiter's wine. He became so enraged that his drink had been sullied, that he decreed that all the dirty snowballs be banished beyond the outer limits of the kingdom".
Exactly. You're seeing the big lie hidden in their carefully worded but highly unlikely theory. They invoke too many things and assume that too many fantasy things actually happened:

• a nebula "collapsed" with no evident cause
• a nuclear bomb (a star) "accreted" and then "ignited"--in thermonuclear fusion--under no actual cause
• planets swirled together at different orbital distances within the "hot gas" for no apparent reason
• "hot gas" disperses and does not "collapse"--the opposite of what they allege must happen--therefore how and why did the hot gas collapse?
• and then Jupiter somehow "pushed out" a giant region of "material" to 1 light year distance away from the Sun--to the alleged Oort Cloud :!: :lol: Gravity now "pushes" things out whenever they want it to! :lol: :lol:

Right :roll:
Last edited by viscount aero on Sat Sep 06, 2014 10:45 am, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
viscount aero
Posts: 2381
Joined: Mon May 12, 2008 11:23 pm
Location: Los Angeles, California
Contact:

Re: Electrical nature of comets will dismantle "Oort Cloud"

Unread post by viscount aero » Sat Sep 06, 2014 10:43 am

Bomb20 wrote:
The Oort Cloud is believed to have been created five billion years ago when a nebula exploded, creating the Sun and its planets. The intense gravitational strength of Jupiter is said to have pushed them to the outer regions of space.

I always wonder how they are making gravitational forces to a pushing force if needed? Why did Jupiter not attract everything around?
Bomb20, you're asking too many questions! :geek:

Gravity is king. It can do whatever it wishes!

And if gravity can't do it then dark matter can! King and queen! Checkmate for you, buddy! :lol:

User avatar
BronzeDragon
Posts: 26
Joined: Tue Aug 26, 2014 6:27 pm
Location: Prescott, AZ
Contact:

Re: Electrical nature of comets will dismantle "Oort Cloud"

Unread post by BronzeDragon » Sun Sep 07, 2014 10:34 am

There is evidence that the Asteroid Belt and the Kuiper Belt exist, but because the Oort Cloud is so far away and the objects are so small, the Oort Cloud will remain a theory for some time.
Actually, it is not a theory, it is a hypothesis. In science, a theory is not just a lucky guess, a general idea, or a vague notion; it is an explanation for a set of observable data. The Oort Cloud, with no data TO observe, simply doesn't cut it.
"I'd take the awe of understanding over the awe of ignorance any day." (Douglas Adams, "The Salmon of Doubt")

User avatar
viscount aero
Posts: 2381
Joined: Mon May 12, 2008 11:23 pm
Location: Los Angeles, California
Contact:

Re: Electrical nature of comets will dismantle "Oort Cloud"

Unread post by viscount aero » Sun Sep 07, 2014 12:46 pm

Correct. The Oort Cloud is not a theory. It never made it to theory status. It is a total rubbish fantasy hypothesis and doesn't exist. It doesn't exist because it was entirely predicated on there being "leftover icy comets from the early solar system that seeded Earth's oceans." Such a notion is absolute and complete rubbish. There are no such damn things as:

• Oort Cloud
• icy comets
• icy comets that seeded Earth's oceans
• icy dirtball comets
• snowy ice dirt comets
• subsurface "liquid oceans on comets"
• "liquid ocean subsurface volatile spewing vents" on comets
• big bang
* CMBR as evidence for big bang
• core accretion/nebular collapse theory
• "early solar system/original ancient remnants" called "comets"
• comets as so-called 'Rosetta Stones' of the cosmos
• icy surfaces for ice harpoons or "ice screws" to securely anchor the Rosetta lander onto on the comet
• "thermonuclear fusion bomb in the Sun"
• "million year solar convection from the interior"
• gravitational lensing
• Hawking radiation
• black holes
• millisecond pulsar/neutron stars
• dark matter
• Higgs field
• impact events that describe and date everything
• absolute and final cosmological radioactive decay rates

These are only some things that are fake, false, and rubbish.

Locked

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 5 guests