Electric Comet ISON - Revealed

reply to post by Pinkorchid

 

Pinkorchid
reply to post by Tallone

Scientific knowledge is always hampered by its retrogressive attributes. By that I mean science can only hold a piece of knowledge that is quantifiable through its own systems , which is themselves do not command the totality of all there is to know.

I agree, although I would call it 'retrogressive attitudes'. Mainly political at base to my mind.

I like this from Carl Sagan, it seems fitting, mainly because I like to remain hopeful we can see change in our own lifetimes you know.

In science it often happens that scientists say, 'You know that's a really good argument; my position is mistaken,' and then they would actually change their minds and you never hear that old view from them again. They really do it. It doesn't happen as often as it should, because scientists are human and change is sometimes painful. But it happens every day. I cannot recall the last time something like that happened in politics or religion.

(1987) -- Carl Sagan

reply to post by Tallone

]The discovery of Asteroid P2013/P5 was exciting because it was further support for the EC / EU model, but it was not a surprise to advocates of EC.

Actually, the standard model has no difficulty explaining how a comet becomes an asteroid-- beyond the pure semantics. As a cometary body outgasses, it eventually loses all its volatile material and becomes inactive. No problem. EU, however cannot explain why one class of object has such intense "electromagnetic interactions" that atoms are assembled out of particle radiation and the same objects, later in their life, no longer have such interactions. Why is that? Seems to me "Asteroid" P2013/P5 indicates yet another fatal flaw in the Electric Universe theory!

reply to post by alfa1

 

alfa1

Tallone
Just take a look at that V-mag! This thing is not dimming as the DST model predicted it would coming only two days before perihelion. Still time of course. Though sh*** but ain't this baby getting bright!

Now you've mentioned the magnitude thing before, but honestly I thought at the time that you'd just made an honest error so I didnt mention it.

But you keep repreating it, so... I can only assume that you must think it is true.

The DST model, as you refer to it, does NOT predict "dimming" as the comet approaches perihelion, and frankly I have no idea where you would get that kind of bizarre idea. The standard conventional comet model assumes it will indeed get brighter as it approaches perihelion. Remember all those sensationalist media screaming headlines of a year ago about "brighter than the full moon"? That was the thought by some, at perihelion.

Right. Another catch... Good proof reading skills again. I shouldn't bother to send posts at that time. But the urge took me. I needed to insert a comma in that sentence. "This thing is not dimming as the DST model predicted it would, coming only two days before perihelion." But even then it wouldn't be a correct statement.

What I do believe DST to hold is that a comet coming out of perihelion will begin to lose brightness, as it leaves the proximity of the Sun. EC advocates note that there are several comets that have BRIGHTENED as their trajectory takes them away from the Sun. At a very basic level, EC just does not agree that outgassing as the nucleus warms up coming closer to the Sun produces of the visible coma and tail. So they don't agree or predict that the coma or tail will disappear as the comet moves away from the Sun.

RE your opening shot about"magnitude thing". I said I had dropped a sentence, and I had. What is with the "I thought" that I (moi) had made an “honest mistake”? I mean it isn’t as though I had made a dishonest mistake was it? How am I supposed to take your posts seriously when there is all of this (to borrow another’s phrase) weasling around with the other’s words? Better to stick with the very good proof reading skills as strategy. That is working at well for you.

But yeah, thanks for posting the personal work. My bet is on ISON getting way brighter than -8, unless it really does violently break up.

reply to post by DJW001


Go ahead then, explain it.

Tallone
Asteroid is now officially named a comet

Hold your horses, where does it say that P2013/P5 is now officially named a comet? I know it is classed as one of main-belt comets, which are different from regular comets, as they are simply asteroids which exhibit comet-like dust activity.

Some astronomers advocating the DST model attempted to explain the anomaly as the result of ‘dust ejection events’.

It is dust. I haven't seen any spectroscopic measurement yet, but the asteroid is metamorphised, meaning it formation involved high temperatures and pressures, which rules out any presense of frozen volatiles, like we see with regular comets.

That it was caused by an increase of rotation, so fast that the spin throws off dust. The trouble with the DST approach as is often the case is the ad hoc nature in which it attempts to account for the new facts being observed. How for example could DST account for the increase in rotation? Why was it ‘throwing off’ dust now and not earlier?

The increase in rotation could be due to the effect of solar radiation, a variation of the Yarkovsky effect.
Where does it say that this dust activity is recent? This object has only been discovered in August 2013, and as soon as it was observed by the Hubble, the tails were already there. This activity might have been going on for decades or centuries.

The EC advocates had always stated that there is very little difference between a comet and an asteroid since they are BOTH, along with meteors “electrically machined from planet surfaces”. They are sourced from ‘planet chunks’. They are recent rather than primordial.

Yet we've seen no such activity with our own eyes or instruments; seen no asteroids or comets that match the composition of any planet exactly. Where are your gigantic thunderbolts? Such events would be very powerful, and should be easy to spot. By the way, since there are no rocky planets beyond Mars, all those comets and asteroids must have come from Mars, Earth, Venus and Mercury? If so, why these planets don't look like swiss cheese, and what force launched all those comets and asteroids outwards beyond Mars?

The discovery of Asteroid P2013/P5 was exciting because it was further support for the EC / EU model, but it was not a surprise to advocates of EC.

Nothing is surprise to you people. Do your "experts" ever learn from new data, change the theoretical to fit the observable, or is everything already decided and set in stone for you?

reply to post by Tallone

Go ahead then, explain it.

The unusual properties of P 2013/P5? Wildespace just did an excellent job. There has also been some speculation that it underwent a number of collisions, churning up the surface and imparting a higher rate of rotation. Either way, its "anomalous" characteristics are simply unusual, and can be explained within the context of the standard model. You, on the other hand, just claimed that it came as no surprise to proponents of EU. Very well, how does EU predict this behavior? What mechanism exclusive only to EU accounts for it?

reply to post by Tallone


Here is a 3D model of Comet Ison for those that like to play around with this sort of thing ......I have Cheezy in mind for that lol.

www.widgetserver.com... 000001428d0168ed&u=http%3A%2F%2Fwingsoflyra.blogspot.com%2F2013%2F11%2Fthis-is-comet-ison-amazing-new-image-of.html

Pinkorchid
reply to post by Tallone

 

Here is a 3D model of Comet Ison for those that like to play around with this sort of thing ......I have Cheezy in mind for that lol.

www.widgetserver.com... 000001428d0168ed&u=http%3A%2F%2Fwingsoflyra.blogspot.com%2F2013%2F11%2Fthis-is-comet-ison-amazing-new-image-of.html

Your link got scrambled. Is this the one you meant? www.cometison2013.co.uk...
It's freaking cool!

wildespace

Pinkorchid
reply to post by Tallone

 

Here is a 3D model of Comet Ison for those that like to play around with this sort of thing ......I have Cheezy in mind for that lol.

www.widgetserver.com... 000001428d0168ed&u=http%3A%2F%2Fwingsoflyra.blogspot.com%2F2013%2F11%2Fthis-is-comet-ison-amazing-new-image-of.html

Your link got scrambled. Is this the one you meant? www.cometison2013.co.uk...
It's freaking cool!

WARNING! NOT TO SCALE!

reply to post by wildespace


lol I must be hitting some debris from Comet Isons Tail.

reply to post by DJW001


This is another video talking about the scale of Ison compared to Encke:-

reply to post by wildespace


MBCs are comets.

I know the Wiki page on MBCs claims they are not but they are. This is a reflection to some extent of not only the dangers of citing Wiki and debate amongst DST advocates over the parameters of that designation. FIY the NASA blurb on the ‘Six tailed’ P/2013 P5 the NASA gives quotes from Jewitt and his team at the Max Planck Institute, so I am following their lead on this one.

You need to read this.
A Population of Comets in the Main Asteroid Belt by Henry H. Hsieh* and David Jewitt.
www2.ess.ucla.edu...

His article is full of hedging, which is to be expected anyway. On one hand he just plain calls it a comet in the early part of the article, on the other by the end he is using the term asteroid a lot. But that is a conundrum for DST, isn’t it? MBCs just don’t fit with their model. Don’t you as a DST advocate just hate that? ‘MBCs’ do fit extremely well with the EC model. Watch the video I posted from the Thunderbolt Project on page 10. It won’t kill you, might bite you, but its only a little in just under 11 minutes.
What Jewitt is suggesting in that article is that the DST model now has 3 cold reservoirs for comets. He is adding the main asteroid belt to the Kuiper Belt and the Oort Cloud!

DJW001
reply to post by Tallone

 

]The discovery of Asteroid P2013/P5 was exciting because it was further support for the EC / EU model, but it was not a surprise to advocates of EC.

Actually, the standard model has no difficulty explaining how a comet becomes an asteroid-- beyond the pure semantics. As a cometary body outgasses, it eventually loses all its volatile material and becomes inactive. No problem. EU, however cannot explain why one class of object has such intense "electromagnetic interactions" that atoms are assembled out of particle radiation and the same objects, later in their life, no longer have such interactions. Why is that? Seems to me "Asteroid" P2013/P5 indicates yet another fatal flaw in the Electric Universe theory!

Could it be that the volatile material is what allows the object to have the intense electromagnetic interactions? Just an odd idea that popped in my mind. Don't mind me. But sometimes, two different materials or types or forms of materials can be combined with certain effect.

Thanks for taking part in this discussion all of you who did. There is no point in my carrying on with the thread.

I will say I do agree with Vind21 above. There is indeed a nice collection of data on ISON and relating to the comet on this thread. Some excellent points raised from both sides of the debate. I would say ISON is not going to change some minds until the status quo changes. Ha ha.

There are good ISON links provided in the thread to.

Tallone
EC predicts interaction between the Sun and a comet.

Prediction, like all you've made so far, does not seem to be working.

Another day, another quiet sun.

Joint USAF/NOAA Solar Geophysical Activity Report and Forecast SDF Number 329 Issued at 2200Z on 25 Nov 2013

Solar activity has been at low levels for the past 24 hours.
Solar activity is likely to be low...
... expected to be very low ...
The geomagnetic field has been at quiet levels for the past 24 hours.
The geomagnetic field is expected to be at quiet...

reply to post by Tallone


Thank you for all your effort Tallone.

There is a time for every ones awakening and that will be guided by the individual, so worry not you have offered up what you can, it is up to the individual to use the information for their highest benefit.