Solar Hurricane Rips Off Comet's Tail 105
coondoggie writes to mention that NASA recently captured images of a solar hurricane ripping the tail off Encke's comet. "In a release, NASA said preliminary analysis suggests that the tail was ripped away when magnetic fields bumped together in an explosive process called "magnetic reconnection." Oppositely directed magnetic fields around the comet "bumped into each" by the magnetic fields in the hurricane. Suddenly, these fields linked together--they "reconnected"--releasing a burst of energy that tore off the comet's tail. A similar process takes place in Earth's magnetosphere during geomagnetic storms fueling, among other things, the Northern Lights, NASA said."
Wonder what the RF signature of that was like (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:Magnetic Reconnection? (Score:1, Interesting)
http://www.electric-cosmos.org/Rejoinder.htm [electric-cosmos.org]
Cometary Tails as Electron Sources (Score:2, Interesting)
The Electric Comet theory is covered in good detail here:
http://www.thunderbolts.info/pdf/ElectricComet.pdf [thunderbolts.info]
I'm sure that Wallace Thornhill will have something to say about this eventually, but this appears to confirm the Electric Universe hypothesis that comets are not sublimating dirty snowballs, but rather electrical phenomenon. The OH that's being observed in cometary tails appears to be the result of electric machining of oxygen from silicates in the comet, which then combine with hydrogen protons from the solar wind to create OH. In other words, the OH is not necessarily an indication of sublimation.
I realize that many people here on Slashdot do not *like* EU Theory and its general lack of quantification, but when our observations appear to be supporting a particular theory, it makes sense that people should temporarily suspend their disbelief and read up on what the theory says. Keep in mind that there is a difference between saying that a theory is not properly quantified and a theory *cannot* be quantified. People have been arguing for sometime now that simple calculations can "prove" that there are not enough charged particles within interstellar space to power the Sun, but these calculations are based upon some rather dramatic assumptions that are not supported by the evolving big picture of the Sun. For instance, of particular importance is the recent paper demonstrating that the solar wind possesses "flux tubes"
From http://scitation.aip.org/getabs/servlet/GetabsServlet?prog=normal&id=APCPCS000932000001000026000001 [aip.org]
In other words, the solar wind appears to bear some resemblance to a novelty plasma ball. My impression is that there is likely very little difference between a "flux tube" and a Birkeland Current.
Spaceweather.com has... (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:Magnetic Reconnection? (Score:3, Interesting)
Are you aware of what helioseismology is and what the implications of the oxygen ratio crisis are? Helioseismology was created to model activity on the Sun based upon observations and theories regarding the Sun's composition. Everybody claimed that it "proved" that we understood the Sun's inner workings. Then, one day, it was discovered that the theories regarding the Sun's composition were in fact somehow wrong.
Are you aware that jets are being discovered on a nearly weekly basis now that are tens and even hundreds of thousands of light years? These jets emit x-rays, which means that the energy for them must be actively replenished in order for the full length of the jet to remain illuminated all at once.
Are you aware that the solar wind continues to accelerate as it leaves the Sun, and even as it passes the planets? Are you aware that mainstream stellar theories lack a convincing theory for how this is possible?
Are you aware that lightning has been observed to be traveling to the edge of Earth's atmosphere, 40 miles above its surface to the edge of space? Why would it be doing that?
Are you aware that stars have been observed to bounce all over the HR diagram?
Are you aware that Halton Arp's statistics have been validated by a third party recently?
What is it about space plasmas that would make them different from laboratory plasmas? In the laboratory, plasmas exhibit three distinct operating modes (dark, glow and arc) and electrical resistance based upon charge density, and a gas becomes a plasma with less than 1% ionization.
Are you aware that we see rilles on all sorts of planets within our solar system that move both up and down with the terrain, in apparent defiance of gravity?
Did you know that all sorts of strange human-created objects and even human bones have been found over the years inside of coal mines, hundreds of feet below the ground's surface, and even inside of rocks?
Did you know that we sent four probes to investigate Venus' anomalous temperature, and all four probes determined that Venus was emitting around 15% more heat than it was absorbing?
Are you aware that there is an inordinate amount of fossil evidence that supports the notion that the Earth used to have a uniform temperature over its entire surface?
Are you aware that the field of comparative mythology (which covers ancient astronomical recordings and historical documents too) has been in a crisis for at least 20 years now, and that there have been recent breakthroughs that reveal that there is information within ancient documents that indicate that the universe operates according to a plasma-based cosmology? Have you read "God Star" by Dwardu Cardona?
Are you aware that solar neutrinos appear to negatively correlate with sunspot frequency? Do understand what this means?
My guess is that you have been restricting your reading materials in a pseudo-skeptical manner. I recommend that you read what is being said before discounting it. That would certainly reduce the amount of garbage that people have to wade through on these forums to get to actual discussion.
Re:Wonder what the RF signature of that was like (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:Magnetic Reconnection? (Score:3, Interesting)
Periodic comets (Score:3, Interesting)
From the article:
If not wrong, then this is certainly misleading. Encke's Comet was the second periodic comet identified, but sheesh - would you say "Sputnik 2 was only the second satellite ever launched"? There are hundreds of known periodic comets [wikipedia.org].Re:Cometary Tails as Electron Sources (Score:2, Interesting)
Only if you ignore the reported figures for what was ejected from the impact: 250,000 metric tons of water.
"What isn't mentioned in that wikipedia article is the arc between the probe and the comet just before impact.
If you think about it, the comet is passing through a charged region of space (solar wind), hence it will be equalise potential to the surrounding plasma. Hence as a probe with a different potential approaches (similar to that of the Earth), an arc discharges between the two."
Only if the difference in electrical potential is great enough to cause a current to flow through a vacuum (or is the vacuum something else you don't believe in?). Here's an idea: maybe the arc wasn't discussed because there wasn't one.
"other texts I have read about that space mission indicated virtually no ice at all."
And if it's written, it must be true and require no verification! Especially the more outlandish writings!
"I have yet to the scientists who know what they are talking about refuses quantisisation of the EU or the relate theories."