JREF Homepage Swift Blog
Events Calendar
$1 Million Paranormal Challenge
The Amaz!ng
Meeting Useful Links
Support Us
James Randi Educational Foundation JREF Forum
Forum Index Register
Members List Events
Tags Help
Go Back <#> JREF Forum » General Topics
» Science, Mathematics, Medicine, and Technology
Reload this Page * The Electric Comet
theory *
Click Here To Donate
User Name Remember Me?
Password
Notices
Advertisement
Help Menu
Frequently Asked Questions
Tutorials and Guides
How To.... Guides
Signatures and Avatars
Post Formatting Codes
Help Forum
Membership Agreement
Membership Agreement FAQ
New Members 'Welcome Thread'
New Members 'Hints & Tips'
The Moderating Team
Contact Us
Site Map
Event Calendars
JREF Events
Member Organized Events
General Events
JREF Forum Site Guide
Links JREF Topics General
Members Only
Forum Home Page Welcome ! General
Skepticism and the Paranormal Science,
Mathematics, Medicine and Technology Community
Forum Index JREF Education
History, Literature, and the Arts
Humor
Links Manager $1M Dollar Challenge
Economics, Business and Finance
Conspiracy Theories
Movies, TV, Music, Computer Gaming, and other Entertainment
vBImage Host Latest Commentary Issues
Religion and Philosophy
Social Issues and Current Events
Puzzles
New Posts
The Amaz!ng Meeting! and other Skeptical Events
Non-USA & General Politics Computers and
Internet Sport
Linking to the Forum The Repository
USA Politics
Conjurer's Corner Forum Rules
Moderating Team Book Reviews
Skeptical Podcasts
Forum Management
Public Notices Forum Spotlight
Forum Help
Reply
Page 17 of 29 *«* First <
7 8
9 10
11
12
13
14
15
16
*17* 18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
>
Last *»*
Thread Tools
Old 11th November 2010, 12:48 PM #*641*
Haig
Critical Thinker
Haig's Avatar
Join Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 367
Originally Posted by *Reality Check* View Post
Ah! So Haig you think this paper has any EU/PC non-science in it without
even reading it?
Not really but it does move away from the magnetic reconnection notion
of what drives solar flares and CME etc. Also they discuss EMF which is
a better explanation for the acceleration of the solar wind.
Quote:
It is obviously abut solar magnetic flux ropes and the toroidal Lorentz
hoop forces on them.
There is also the well known mainstream acceleration of particles by the
magnetic fields (producing X-rays).
Yes, even NASA are talking about magnetic ropes connecting the Sun to
the Earth and supplying the power to drive the Aurora. How do these
magnetic ropes not dispensate, maybe they are really Birkland currents
Quote:
But I do see where you got the idea that it does - there is a
Thunderbolts forum post mentioning the paper.
Ah! you read Thunderbolts too ;-)
Quote:
The author merely quotes the abstract and underlines that the paper is
an alternative electromagnetic explanation to the magnetic reconnection
theory.
Yes, I know but it's a big step away from the dead end of magnetic
reconnection theory.
Quote:
I hope that you are not one of the ignorant people that do not know the
0.6 is less that 3.0.
Hope not.
Quote:
The application of the laws of electromagnetism (e.g. Maxwell's
eqiuations) to physical situations.
Agreed, they should be applied more in astronomy.
Originally Posted by *Perpetual Student* View Post
*To those who fight the never ending battle against crackpots like
Sol88, Mozina, etc.:
Your patience and endurance are admirable. Without your efforts these
people would likely influence some of the uninformed audience to believe
their nonsense. The more the lay public understands the nature of true
science, the better off is our whole society.
Thank you for your contributions to this forum. *
Your entitled to your view but 60 years ago the scientific heretics
pointed to the electromagnetic nature of our solar system. Today, the
mainstream has dropped the sterile vacuum of space in favour of
"space-weather" A rose by any other name .... Tomorrow, they may don
more of the heretics clothes.
Originally Posted by *DeiRenDopa* View Post
Why?
Well, I like to read for myself, if possible, before forming a view on
something. Also, this paper, at least in the abstract, dismisses
magnetic reconnection, which is a huge step towards EU/PC in my opinion.
Quote:
What, quantitatively, is the nature of the Sun's electric field,
sufficient and necessary for the electric comet idea to be consistent
with all the relevant observations (of comets)?
See my post to DD.
Haig is offline Quote this post in a PM
Nominate this post for this
month's language award
Copy a direct
link to this post Reply With Quote
Back to Top <#JREF_Forum_top>
Haig
View Public Profile
Find More Posts by Haig
Old 11th November 2010, 01:00 PM #*642*
DeiRenDopa
Master Poster
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 2,045
Originally Posted by *Haig* View Post
[...]
[me: why (does the paper you cited seem like EU/PC stuff to many)?]
Well, I like to read for myself, if possible, before forming a view on
something. Also, this paper, at least in the abstract, dismisses
magnetic reconnection, which is a huge step towards EU/PC in my opinion.
I think you may not have understood what the paper - or even the
abstract - actually says (in terms of plasma physics) ... it does not
"dismiss magnetic reconnection", it merely says that such a process may
not be necessary to account for certain observed phenomena.
If I may be so bold, I'd recommend that, if you are interested in this
subject, you take some time and trouble to learn at least the basics of
plasma physics. That should stand you in good stead when it comes to
making informed judgements about what you read on the TB website, and
what's posted here by the likes of tusenfem (an active researcher in
space physics, who studied (got his PhD?) under Hannes Alfvén). It would
also prevent you from writing comments that put you in the same class as
the likes of Sol88, who are not only grossly ignorant of the relevant
science, but apparently very proud of their ignorance.
Quote:
[me: What, quantitatively, is the nature of the Sun's electric field,
sufficient and necessary for the electric comet idea to be consistent
with all the relevant observations (of comets)?]
See my post to DD.
Sorry, I read that reply, several times, and I could find nothing
*quantitative* in it whatsoever.
Would you care to have another go at answering my question?
DeiRenDopa is offline Quote this post in a PM
Nominate this post for this
month's language award
Copy a direct
link to this post Reply With Quote
Back to Top <#JREF_Forum_top>
DeiRenDopa
View Public Profile
Find More Posts by DeiRenDopa
Old 11th November 2010, 01:46 PM #*643*
Reality Check
Philosopher
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: New Zealand
Posts: 7,791
Originally Posted by *Haig* View Post
Not really but it does move away from the magnetic reconnection notion
of what drives solar flares and CME etc. Also they discuss EMF which is
a better explanation for the acceleration of the solar wind.
Wrong: They propose an alternative mechanism to the magnetic
reconnection driving of *CME only*.
Originally Posted by *Haig* View Post
Yes, even NASA are talking about magnetic ropes connecting the Sun to
the Earth and supplying the power to drive the Aurora. How do these
magnetic ropes not dispensate, maybe they are really Birkland currents
No they are not:Birkland currents
Originally Posted by *Haig* View Post
Yes, I know but it's a big step away from the dead end of magnetic
reconnection theory.
No I do not bother reading a non-science, crank web site. I do know how
to use Google though .
Originally Posted by *Haig* View Post
Yes, I know but it's a big step away from the dead end of magnetic
reconnection theory.
Magnetic reconnection theory is not dead. It is alive and kicking and
being used in magnetic reconnection experiments around the world.
Originally Posted by *Haig* View Post
Hope not.
So you agree that: *The totally stupid electric comet idea has been
debunked!*
Thta is great to know that you are capable of learning physics, unlike
Sol88 and the other EU/PC proponents.
Originally Posted by *Haig* View Post
Agreed, they should be applied more in astronomy.
They are applied all the time in astronomy.
I think that you are parroting the EU/PC delusion that the "electro"
part of "electromagnetic" is ignored or downplayed in astronomy. That is
wrong as a simple literature search will show you.
There is a practical aspect though - magnetic fields are easier to
detect than electric fields. So astronomers tend to describe
observations that are electromagnetic in terms of the magnetic field.
They know that this is equivalent to describing the observations in
terms of electrical fields (so long as relativistic effects can be
ignored) because an electrical field can be deduced from a magnetic field.
Originally Posted by *Haig* View Post
Your entitled to your view but 60 years ago the scientific heretics
pointed to the electromagnetic nature of our solar system.
Wrong: The electromagnetic nature of our solar system has been well
known for a centry or so as pointed to by scientists, e.g. since
Birkeland showed that aurora were generated from the interaction between
the solar wind and the Earth's magnetic field.
Originally Posted by *Haig* View Post
Today, the mainstream has dropped the sterile vacuum of space in favour
of "space-weather"
Still wrong by many decades.
Originally Posted by *Haig* View Post
Well, I like to read for myself, if possible, before forming a view on
something. Also, this paper, at least in the abstract, dismisses
magnetic reconnection, which is a huge step towards EU/PC in my opinion.
See my post to DD.
The paper does not dissmiss magnetic reconnection.
Dismissing magnetic reconnection for a specific set of observed
phenomena has nothing to do with the validity of EU/PC.
EU/PC has no validity. It is a collection of often mutually exclusive
theories that are mostly wrong and differ according to which EU/PC
proponent you talk to.
But we are derailing the thread which is about the electric comet idea.
I suggest you take the general EU/PC non-science stuff to one of the
other threads on teh subject.
__________________
Real Science: NASA Finds Direct Proof of Dark Matter
(another observation
) (and Abell
520 )
"Our Undiscovered Universe" by Terence Witt: Review 1
; Review 2
Reality Check is offline Quote this post in a PM
Nominate this post for this
month's language award
Copy a direct
link to this post Reply With Quote
Back to Top <#JREF_Forum_top>
Reality Check
View Public Profile
Visit Reality Check's homepage!
Find More Posts by Reality Check
Old 11th November 2010, 08:03 PM #*644*
Sol88
Muse
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 691
Agian what are the bright "spots" on the surface of
Borrelly
Halley
Wild 2
Hartley 2
Temple 1
RC? DD? DieRD? TimT?
__________________
I see that tusenfem become the third person to have a go at your list,
while I was posting; of course that will change my two lists /somewhat/
... (DeiRenDopa)
I'm always in the plasma, it's just the density that varies! (Sol88)
?Black holes are where God divided by zero.? ? Comedian Steven Wright
------------------------------------------------------------------------
/ Last edited by Sol88 ; 11th November 2010
at 09:22 PM. Reason: added temple 1 /
Sol88 is offline Quote this post in a PM
Nominate this post for this
month's language award
Copy a direct
link to this post Reply With Quote
Back to Top <#JREF_Forum_top>
Sol88
View Public Profile
Find More Posts by Sol88
Old 11th November 2010, 08:22 PM #*645*
Sol88
Muse
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 691
[quote=ben m;6527775]
Originally Posted by *Sol88* View Post
Lets try -4000v LINK
-4000V? On the whole moon? Sol88, have you /ever/ done anything with
that number? I just did. Calculate how much energy is stored by the
excess charge on a 4000V moon. It's about one kilojoule. It's not enough
electrical energy to /brew a cup of coffee/. It's not enough energy to
fire a /camera flashbulb/. It's about the energy you get from /eating
one Tic Tac/.
Yes, tiny /static/ amount of charge separation, creating barely any
voltage, storing practically no energy, and (listen carefully) NOT
DISCHARGING. These are static conditions.
Not if they're still in the diffusion situation that separated them to
begin with. Anyway, if they DO "get back together", nothing happens.
There's no energy there to do anything visible.
Now I remember why I had you on ignore for years, Sol88.
Mmmmm....don't know if that'd be correct, I'll do some more digging. I
feel positive that the is more energy involed than that of a tic tak!!!
__________________
I see that tusenfem become the third person to have a go at your list,
while I was posting; of course that will change my two lists /somewhat/
... (DeiRenDopa)
I'm always in the plasma, it's just the density that varies! (Sol88)
?Black holes are where God divided by zero.? ? Comedian Steven Wright
Sol88 is offline Quote this post in a PM
Nominate this post for this
month's language award
Copy a direct
link to this post Reply With Quote
Back to Top <#JREF_Forum_top>
Sol88
View Public Profile
Find More Posts by Sol88
Old 11th November 2010, 08:55 PM #*646*
Humanzee
Critical Thinker
Humanzee's Avatar
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: I...hate...tapir...bones...
Posts: 411
Lovely pics. Are they suppose to mean something to this lurker. Do they
prove or show something relevent?
Humanzee is offline Quote this post in a PM
Nominate this post for this
month's language award
Copy a direct
link to this post Reply With Quote
Back to Top <#JREF_Forum_top>
Humanzee
View Public Profile
Find More Posts by Humanzee
Old 11th November 2010, 09:28 PM #*647*
Sol88
Muse
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 691
Originally Posted by *Humanzee* View Post
Lovely pics. Are they suppose to mean something to this lurker. Do they
prove or show something relevent?
Yes, the bright spots in mainstream think are "ice" are they???
__________________
I see that tusenfem become the third person to have a go at your list,
while I was posting; of course that will change my two lists /somewhat/
... (DeiRenDopa)
I'm always in the plasma, it's just the density that varies! (Sol88)
?Black holes are where God divided by zero.? ? Comedian Steven Wright
Sol88 is offline Quote this post in a PM
Nominate this post for this
month's language award
Copy a direct
link to this post Reply With Quote
Back to Top <#JREF_Forum_top>
Sol88
View Public Profile
Find More Posts by Sol88
Old 11th November 2010, 09:30 PM #*648*
Perpetual Student
Master Poster
Perpetual Student's Avatar
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: USA
Posts: 2,654
I see we have another "looks like a bunny" scientist--wannabe here.
__________________
\xi
Perpetual Student is offline Quote this post in a PM
Nominate this post for this
month's language award
Copy a direct
link to this post Reply With Quote
Back to Top <#JREF_Forum_top>
Perpetual Student
View Public Profile
Find More Posts by Perpetual Student
Old 11th November 2010, 09:34 PM #*649*
Reality Check
Philosopher
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: New Zealand
Posts: 7,791
Originally Posted by *Sol88* View Post
Agian what are the bright "spots" on the surface of
Borrelly
http://www.holoscience.com/news/img/comet_borrelly.jpg
Halley
http://www.holoscience.com/news/img/comethalley.jpg
Wild 2
http://www.lib.uchicago.edu/~dean/blog/wild2.jpg
Hartley 2
http://www.jpl.nasa.gov/images/epoxi...ey-2-slide.jpg
Temple 1
http://apod.nasa.gov/apod/image/0507...l1_its_mov.jpg
RC? DD? DieRD? TimT?
I know what they are not - anything contained in *The totally stupid
electric comet idea that has been debunked!*
,
e.g. the physically impossible electrical discharges.
Thank you once again Sol88 for reminding the world how utterly insane
the electric comment idea is.
As for the bright spots, I would guess:
* Sunlight reflecting from reflective surfaces like water ice.
* Some look like whiter material revealed by the jets.
* Others could be internal material deposited by the jets.
* Sunlight reflecting from vertical surfaces providing a contrast to
the horizontal surface (Temple 1?)
* etc.
__________________
Real Science: NASA Finds Direct Proof of Dark Matter
(another observation
) (and Abell
520 )
"Our Undiscovered Universe" by Terence Witt: Review 1
; Review 2
------------------------------------------------------------------------
/ Last edited by Reality Check ; 11th
November 2010 at 09:51 PM. /
Reality Check is offline Quote this post in a PM
Nominate this post for this
month's language award
Copy a direct
link to this post Reply With Quote
Back to Top <#JREF_Forum_top>
Reality Check
View Public Profile
Visit Reality Check's homepage!
Find More Posts by Reality Check
Old 11th November 2010, 09:38 PM #*650*
Reality Check
Philosopher
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: New Zealand
Posts: 7,791
Originally Posted by *Sol88* View Post
Yes, the bright spots in mainstream think are "ice" are they???
As far as I know surface ice has only been found on Tempel 1.
The bright spots in the various images probably have various causes.
This of course points out the idiocy of posting images without links
back to the source. I suspect that the sources say exactly what the
bright spots are.
Except the crackpot holoscience web site which will proabably spout
their fantasies about what the bright spots are.
__________________
Real Science: NASA Finds Direct Proof of Dark Matter
(another observation
) (and Abell
520 )
"Our Undiscovered Universe" by Terence Witt: Review 1
; Review 2
------------------------------------------------------------------------
/ Last edited by Reality Check ; 11th
November 2010 at 09:53 PM. /
Reality Check is offline Quote this post in a PM
Nominate this post for this
month's language award
Copy a direct
link to this post Reply With Quote
Back to Top <#JREF_Forum_top>
Reality Check
View Public Profile
Visit Reality Check's homepage!
Find More Posts by Reality Check
Old 11th November 2010, 09:56 PM #*651*
Sol88
Muse
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 691
Originally Posted by *Reality Check* View Post
I konw what they are not - anything contained in *The totally stupid
electric comet idea that has been debunked!*
Thank you once again Sol88 for pointing out how utterly insane the
electric comment idea is.
As for the bright spots, I would guess:
* Sunlight reflecting from reflective surfaces like water ice.
* Some look like whiter material revealed by the jets.
* Others could be internal material deposited by the jets.
"ice" it is then!
LINK
Quote:
This image of the surface of comet Tempel 1 was taken about 20 seconds
before Deep Impact's probe crashed into the comet at 10:52 p.m. Pacific
time, July 3. This particular region contains the impact site.
The bright patches in the image may consist of very smooth and
reflective material, the composition of which will be determined by Deep
Impact's spectrometer. Dark areas are in shadow and provide information
about surface topography. Higher terrain appears rough relative to lower
areas that appear very smooth. Is this a layered surface? And how did
the smooth regions form? These are some of the questions the science
team plans to address.
This image was taken by the probe's impactor targeting sensor.
Did Deep Impact's spectrometer get that mystery sorted?
Looks like a bunny, walks like a bunny....
__________________
I see that tusenfem become the third person to have a go at your list,
while I was posting; of course that will change my two lists /somewhat/
... (DeiRenDopa)
I'm always in the plasma, it's just the density that varies! (Sol88)
?Black holes are where God divided by zero.? ? Comedian Steven Wright
Sol88 is offline Quote this post in a PM
Nominate this post for this
month's language award
Copy a direct
link to this post Reply With Quote
Back to Top <#JREF_Forum_top>
Sol88
View Public Profile
Find More Posts by Sol88
Old 11th November 2010, 09:59 PM #*652*
Sol88
Muse
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 691
Originally Posted by *Reality Check* View Post
As far as I know surface ice has only been found on Tempel 1.
The bright spots in the various images probably have various causes.
This of course points out the idiocy of posting images without links
back to the source. I suspect that the sources say exactly what the
bright spots are.
Except the crackpot holoscience web site which will proabably spout
their fantasies about what the bright spots are.
Yes you are correct RC, they site does indeed say exactly what the
bright spot are....they're bright spots and we dont know why they are
there!!!
But the jets seem to issue from bright "spots"
__________________
I see that tusenfem become the third person to have a go at your list,
while I was posting; of course that will change my two lists /somewhat/
... (DeiRenDopa)
I'm always in the plasma, it's just the density that varies! (Sol88)
?Black holes are where God divided by zero.? ? Comedian Steven Wright
Sol88 is offline Quote this post in a PM
Nominate this post for this
month's language award
Copy a direct
link to this post Reply With Quote
Back to Top <#JREF_Forum_top>
Sol88
View Public Profile
Find More Posts by Sol88
Old 12th November 2010, 12:29 AM #*653*
tusenfem
Muse
tusenfem's Avatar
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Graz, Austria
Posts: 946
Originally Posted by *Humanzee* View Post
Lovely pics. Are they suppose to mean something to this lurker. Do they
prove or show something relevent?
Apparently, at least according to Sol88, the overexposed parts of those
pictures show electrical discharges from negatively charged surface to
negatively charged surface.
For people who really think, it is clear that the albedo of the surface
is NOT uniform (why should it be) nor is the colour. To make things
visible in the dark parts of the comet's nucleus one unfortunately needs
to over expose the brighter parts.
__________________
*20 minutes into the future
This message is bra-bra-brought to you by z-z-z-zik zak
And-And-And I'm going to be back with you - on Network 23 after these
real-real-real-really exciting messages*
(Max Headroom)
tusenfem is offline Quote this post in a PM
Nominate this post for this
month's language award
Copy a direct
link to this post Reply With Quote
Back to Top <#JREF_Forum_top>
tusenfem
View Public Profile
Visit tusenfem's homepage!
Find More Posts by tusenfem
Old 12th November 2010, 12:33 AM #*654*
tusenfem
Muse
tusenfem's Avatar
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Graz, Austria
Posts: 946
Oh this is going to be so much fun when I start working on the magnetic
field and plasma data from Rosetta in 2014 (ughhh so long still), with
the satellite in orbit around Churyumov-Gerasimenko and the lander on
the nucleus.
__________________
*20 minutes into the future
This message is bra-bra-brought to you by z-z-z-zik zak
And-And-And I'm going to be back with you - on Network 23 after these
real-real-real-really exciting messages*
(Max Headroom)
tusenfem is offline Quote this post in a PM
Nominate this post for this
month's language award
Copy a direct
link to this post Reply With Quote
Back to Top <#JREF_Forum_top>
tusenfem
View Public Profile
Visit tusenfem's homepage!
Find More Posts by tusenfem
Old 12th November 2010, 02:02 AM #*655*
Aitch
Guest
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: StAines
Posts: 2,731
Originally Posted by *tusenfem* View Post
Apparently, at least according to Sol88, the overexposed parts of those
pictures show electrical discharges from negatively charged surface to
negatively charged surface.
For people who really think, it is clear that the albedo of the surface
is NOT uniform (why should it be) nor is the colour. To make things
visible in the dark parts of the comet's nucleus one unfortunately needs
to over expose the brighter parts.
Ah, so they've ruled out the possibility that it's the light from the
welding torches of the NWO operatives who are weaponizing the comets
ready for the next false flag operation, then?
Aitch is offline Quote this post in a PM
Nominate this post for this
month's language award
Copy a direct
link to this post Reply With Quote
Back to Top <#JREF_Forum_top>
Aitch
View Public Profile
Find More Posts by Aitch
Old 12th November 2010, 02:36 AM #*656*
Sol88
Muse
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 691
Quote:
Originally Posted by Haig View Post
Yes, even NASA are talking about magnetic ropes connecting the Sun to
the Earth and supplying the power to drive the Aurora. How do these
magnetic ropes not dispensate, maybe they are really Birkland currents
Quote:
Originally Posted by Reality Check: No they are not:Birkland currents
What are they then?
__________________
I see that tusenfem become the third person to have a go at your list,
while I was posting; of course that will change my two lists /somewhat/
... (DeiRenDopa)
I'm always in the plasma, it's just the density that varies! (Sol88)
?Black holes are where God divided by zero.? ? Comedian Steven Wright
------------------------------------------------------------------------
/ Last edited by Sol88 ; 12th November 2010
at 02:37 AM. /
Sol88 is offline Quote this post in a PM
Nominate this post for this
month's language award
Copy a direct
link to this post Reply With Quote
Back to Top <#JREF_Forum_top>
Sol88
View Public Profile
Find More Posts by Sol88
Old 12th November 2010, 02:41 AM #*657*
Sol88
Muse
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 691
Originally Posted by *tusenfem* View Post
Apparently, at least according to Sol88, the overexposed parts of those
pictures show electrical discharges from negatively charged surface to
negatively charged surface.
For people who really think, it is clear that the albedo of the surface
is NOT uniform (why should it be) nor is the colour. To make things
visible in the dark parts of the comet's nucleus one unfortunately needs
to over expose the brighter parts.
How much information can we pull from the whiteout areas? How many
pixels can we gather some sort of picture from?
I mean, I zoom in on non whitearea and see dark and gray spots, in the
whiteout, ZIP!
What there metallic mirrors or something down there?
__________________
I see that tusenfem become the third person to have a go at your list,
while I was posting; of course that will change my two lists /somewhat/
... (DeiRenDopa)
I'm always in the plasma, it's just the density that varies! (Sol88)
?Black holes are where God divided by zero.? ? Comedian Steven Wright
Sol88 is offline Quote this post in a PM
Nominate this post for this
month's language award
Copy a direct
link to this post Reply With Quote
Back to Top <#JREF_Forum_top>
Sol88
View Public Profile
Find More Posts by Sol88
Old 12th November 2010, 04:51 AM #*658*
DeiRenDopa
Master Poster
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 2,045
Originally Posted by *Perpetual Student* View Post
I see we have another "looks like a bunny" scientist--wannabe here.
Actually, I don't think so.
AFAICS, Sol88 has not offered any interpretation of images! Instead, he
has asked what certain features he sees on those images are ... with the
implication that because there is no good answer from the scientists who
study comets, then the electric comet idea MUST be right! IOW, the
logical fallacy called false dichotomy.
However, he does not actually say this; why?
DeiRenDopa is offline Quote this post in a PM
Nominate this post for this
month's language award
Copy a direct
link to this post Reply With Quote
Back to Top <#JREF_Forum_top>
DeiRenDopa
View Public Profile
Find More Posts by DeiRenDopa
Old 12th November 2010, 06:50 AM #*659*
Dancing David
Penultimate Amazing
Dancing David's Avatar
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Central Illinois
Posts: 26,350
Haig,
Two problems,
-the solar wind is comprised of three types of particles, negative ions,
positive ions and neutral atoms and molecules, so what kind of the
charge does that indicate? (You have to do better than you did.)
-Um you do know that many comets like Hartley2 , do not have hugely
elliptical orbits and so how does this alleged charge difference
generate, so there is really a charge difference in Hartly2's orbit?
What about the asteroids with comas that are in almost circular orbits?
You do know that the ?dirty ice? is like CO_2 and things like that?
__________________
Note: Often I am drawing too fine a point and will agree with you anyway
in a general sense.
"To say we need to travel everywhere in order to say there is no God is
like saying we need to look behind the fridge to be sure our house isn't
infested with galaxy clusters. "-Piggy
Dancing David is offline Quote this post in a PM
Nominate this post for this
month's language award
Copy a direct
link to this post Reply With Quote
Back to Top <#JREF_Forum_top>
Dancing David
View Public Profile
Find More Posts by Dancing David
Old 12th November 2010, 07:00 AM #*660*
tusenfem
Muse
tusenfem's Avatar
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Graz, Austria
Posts: 946
Originally Posted by *Sol88* View Post
How much information can we pull from the whiteout areas? How many
pixels can we gather some sort of picture from?
I mean, I zoom in on non whitearea and see dark and gray spots, in the
whiteout, ZIP!
What there metallic mirrors or something down there?
If optical observations would be the only thing, then one needs to make
pics with various resolutions, which was actually done. I just heard a
talk by Nick Thomas in Bern, and the details of the surface we have of
Hartley 2 are actually frakkin amazing!!! And in the pictures that can
be used for scientific purposes, there is little or no over exposure.
Oops, I am mixing up my flybys, this is about Rosetta flying by Lutetia.
Never mind, there are other experiments on deep impact that measure
Hartley 2, and found out that there is a lot of CO_2 see here
,
I cannot find the pic at the moment where they show the CO_2 signature
around the comet.
I am not familiar with how deep impact works and how versatile the
camera that took the pictures is and I do not know how long the actual
flyby lasted, for which there are images (and I am too lazy right now to
look it up). But I can imagine that, as this is just extra stuff, the
camera has just one exposure time and no pointing qualities, but I am
gladly corrected on this by someone who knows better. Interesting is the
45 sec movie that shows the comet tumbling around and every time that
the jets get into the sunshine the light up.
But Sol88 seems to have a kind of simple minded idea about how thing
can/are working in such missions.
__________________
*20 minutes into the future
This message is bra-bra-brought to you by z-z-z-zik zak
And-And-And I'm going to be back with you - on Network 23 after these
real-real-real-really exciting messages*
(Max Headroom)
tusenfem is offline Quote this post in a PM
Nominate this post for this
month's language award
Copy a direct
link to this post Reply With Quote
Back to Top <#JREF_Forum_top>
tusenfem
View Public Profile
Visit tusenfem's homepage!
Find More Posts by tusenfem