bad news from nasa: proof that comet elenin is affecting earth.

Originally posted by dethduck

Dear god. *facepalm*
Firstly, Leonid is NOT the name of the comet. Leonid is the name of the Russian astronomer that discovered it, Leonid Elenin.

who said it was ? be careful with your "assumptions"

Secondly, the comet had absolutely nothing to do with the Leonid meteor shower. In fact, its closest approach flyby is a full month nearly to the day before the Leonids peak in November.

what's a meteor shower ?

when is it that Earth will go through the waste left by elenin ?

Thirdly, it did not come out the constellation of Leo.

vocabulary + english is not my mother tongue so i rephrase for you : if it is visible it will be by the naked eye, at dawn, just before... in the constellation of ... Leo

dear god... so plenty of coincidence to deal with after all

prove me this leonid is a real man and i might close the case as mere coincidences without the ""

hey, when it gets close enough can someone send me a message concerning whether i should just duck or kiss my ass goodbye?

reply to post by kolcath


astroblogger.blogspot.com...

this states posible mass and size posible similaritys and a few things on elnin

Originally posted by Solsthime331
reply to post by kolcath

 

astroblogger.blogspot.com...

this states posible mass and size posible similaritys and a few things on elnin

Good Find!

There are a lot of odd thoughts here such as a cheapo telescope being able to find a dim dot in space.

What can be seen all depends on the magnitude or bright of the object. The brightness of a comet increases as material boils off the surface and spreads out to form the coma.

The idea that a comet could be seen in daylight is rather odd. They are never as bright as Venus. Venus can be seen in the day time with the unaided eye by knowing where to look. Comets are not bright enough because they are so small.

reply to post by crazydaisy


same here! its crazy!

Originally posted by stereologist
There are a lot of odd thoughts here such as a cheapo telescope being able to find a dim dot in space.

What can be seen all depends on the magnitude or bright of the object. The brightness of a comet increases as material boils off the surface and spreads out to form the coma.

The idea that a comet could be seen in daylight is rather odd. They are never as bright as Venus. Venus can be seen in the day time with the unaided eye by knowing where to look. Comets are not bright enough because they are so small.

that is not completely true. In 1997 Hale-Bopp was brighter then Venus. You could see it with the naked eye even during the day. It was visible for 18 months.

reply to post by Pedyboy


I thought winning the lottery was a good thing.

What happens when this object gets close to the sun causing a massive solar flare that wipes out all electricity in the world?

Internet would obviously be taken down. I just hope that people have got plans set for offline in case. All I am saying is prepare for a survival situation.

reply to post by XmikaX


The reason we have detected little surface water ice on comets is that water (even as ice) sublimates into space in a vacuum, therefore each comet is likely to have a crust of dust protecting its icy core.

Please note that the ice is not neccesarily all water ice. There are also frozen carbon-monoxide, carbon-dioxide and methane components in a comets ice.

Spectral analysis (and flythrough capture of cometary matter) of the tails of several comets has indicated that the coma is mostly water and since the outside of a comet appears to have little water, it must be coming from inside the comet. This also indicates that most comets consist of a high percentage of water ice.

Water ice was actually detected on the surface of comet Tempel-1 back in 2006. This is from the Deep Impact site about the 2006 results:

Imaging with the two cameras, the HRI and MRI showed small regions that were about 30% brighter than surrounding areas. After scaling the images to an average value of the nucleus, three discrete areas on the nucleus are brighter in the ultraviolet and darker in the near-infrared. When Co-Investigator Dr. Jessica Sunshine looked at the spectra in that region, after subtracting a thermal component, what was left was the spectral signature of water ice, in the form of absorption bands at 1.5 and 2.0 µm. Absorption bands at these wavelengths are diagnostic of water ice. The combination of the relative colors and the spectra make a powerful case that there is water ice at these specific locations on Tempel 1.

Given that the spectrometer has a two dimensional detector, it is possible to make a map of Tempel 1 at the wavelength of the ice absorption bands. That map shows that the bright regions in the UV are correlated with dark regions in the near-IR where water ice absorbs light. Since the visible images have a higher spatial resolution, we use those images to calculate the extent of ice on Tempel 1's surface. That turns out to be a small fraction of the surface, only 0.5%. Next, the temperature map is combined with the color map, showing that two of the three regions are colder regions of the nucleus. Stereo images show the largest area of ice to be a depression 80 meters below surrounding areas. Never the less, the temperatures in this region are 285 -295 K, significantly above the ~200K at which ice would sublimate in space at the location of Tempel 1.

What is significant is that the extent of this ice on Tempel 1's surface is not sufficient to produce the observed abundance of water and its by-products in the comet's coma. The team thus concludes that there are sources of water from beneath the comet's surface that supply the cometary coma as well.

reply to post by Mythos13

that is not completely true. In 1997 Hale-Bopp was brighter then Venus. You could see it with the naked eye even during the day. It was visible for 18 months.

Venus reaches a brightness of -4.6.
Venus
I can't find anywhere that the comet had a negative magnitude.

The comet may have been visible to the naked eye for 18 months, but that does not mean it was visible during the day time.

Here is one reference to Hale-Bopp visible in the day time.
comet Hale-Bopp

On March 9, a solar eclipse in China, Mongolia and eastern Siberia allowed observers there to see the comet in the daytime.

Later on it states:

It was also brighter than magnitude 0 for eight weeks, longer than any other recorded comet.

Although bright it was dimmer than Venus.

reply to post by spydrbyte25


Why would the comet cause a solar flare?
Why would it be in such a position to cause the flare to hit the Earth?
If we see large flare headed our way don't you think we can do a shut down until the danger is past?

Originally posted by chr0naut
reply to post by XmikaX


Water ice was actually detected on the surface of comet Tempel-1 back in 2006. This is from the Deep Impact site about the 2006 results:

yes and from their calculations from the same page or the next paper, it represents about 0.5% that was the point, the dust cover doesn't explain for the crater nor the strength of the explosion.

we just don't know peanuts about comets, get over it.

Originally posted by chr0naut
reply to post by XmikaX


Water ice was actually detected on the surface of comet Tempel-1 back in 2006. This is from the Deep Impact site about the 2006 results:

yes and from their calculations from the same page or the next paper, it represents about 0.5% that was the point, the dust cover doesn't explain for the crater nor the strength of the explosion.

we just don't know peanuts about comets, get over it.

reply to post by XmikaX


You seem to be missing that the particular data you cite, only referred to an impact with the surface of one comet, not its entire makeup.

The crust on the outside was thicker and more explosively reactive than expected. This does not disagree with current theory.

Its true we don't know that much about comets. But what we do know is in sharp disagreement with what you describe.

There are similar shortcomings in the "electric universe" theory that electrostatic charges and plasmas are the primary forces on bodies in space. The equations governing electrical fields have been known and verified since Michael Faraday proposed them back in the 1830's.

If you apply the equations for electrical fields and charges to astronomical objects, even taking into account relativistic effects, it soon becomes plain that there is insufficient agreement to support the "electric universe" theory/s.

I would love electrogravitics to provide a significant force but in every actual experiment, the effect is negligible if anything.

reply to post by stereologist


Here are a few that have hit negative numbers, and were brighter then Venus.Well not the -3 and -1.

(-10) C/1965 S1 (Ikeya-Seki)
(-5.5) C/2006 P1 (McNaught)
-3.0 C/1975 V1 (West)
(-3) C/1947 X1 (Southern comet)
(-1) C/1948 V1 (Eclipse comet)

source

I will however admit i was wrong about Hale-bopp, seems my memory is more fond of it then the evidence.

reply to post by Mythos13


Thanks so much for bringing that to my attention.Well, done. That was very interesting and I appreciate your efforts very much. I find it absolutely fabulous and wonderful that a comet can outshine event he brightest planet in the sky.

Thanks again!

reply to post by stereologist


No problem , my friend. the way i see it, the more legitimate sources of information that we can share and learn from, the better off we are in the long run.

This inofmration reeks of #ING BULL#.
We do know the size of the comet ( isn't it 4km? or a couple hundred meters) there was a picture size comparason with earth posted awhile ago.

The news isn't from nasa

I just posted a great article in another thread about Elenin i will share the link here as well.
Elenin Article


This was written by

My name is Bob King and I work at the Duluth News Tribune in Duluth, Minn. as a photographer and photo editor. I'm also an amateur astronomer and have been keen on the sky since age 11. My modest credentials include membership in the American Association of Variable Star Observers (AAVSO) where I'm a regular contributor, International Meteorite Collectors Assn. and Arrowhead Astronomical Society. I also teach community education astronomy classes at our local planetarium