Researchers present list of comet 67P/Churyumov-Gerasimenko ingredients

December 1, 2017, Max Planck Society
Left: The surface of Rosetta’s comet. As the comet approaches the Sun, frozen gases evaporate from below the surface, dragging tiny particles of dust along with them. Right: These dust grains can be captured and examined using the COSIMA instrument. Targets such as this one measuring only a few centimeters act as dust collectors. They retain dust particles of up to 100 microns in size. Credit: ESA/Rosetta/MPS for OSIRIS Team MPS/UPD/LAM/IAA/SSO/INTA/UPM/DASP/IDA (left), ESA / Rosetta / MPS for COSIMA Team MPS / CSNSM / UNIBW / TUORLA / IWF / IAS / ESA / BUW / MPE / LPC2E / LCM / IMF / UTU / LISA / UOFC / vH & S. (right)

The dust that comet 67P/Churyumov-Gerasimenko emits into space consists to about one half of organic molecules. The dust belongs to the most pristine and carbon-rich material known in our solar system and has hardly changed since its birth. These results of the COSIMA team are published today in the journal Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society. COSIMA is an instrument onboard the Rosetta spacecraft, which investigated comet 67P/Churyumov-Gerasimenko from August 2014 to September 2016. In their current study, the involved researchers including scientists from the Max Planck Institute for Solar System Research (MPS) analyze as comprehensively as ever before, what chemical elements constitute cometary dust.

When a comet traveling along it highly elliptical orbit approaches the Sun, it becomes active: frozen gases evaporate, dragging tiny dust into space. Capturing and examining these grains provides the opportunity to trace the "building materials" of the comet itself. So far, only few space missions have succeeded in this endeavor. These include ESA's Rosetta mission. Unlike their predecessors, for their current study the Rosetta researchers were able to collect and analyze of various sizes over a period of approximately two years. In comparison, earlier missions, such as Giotto's Flyby of comet 1P/Halley or Stardust, which even returned from comet 81P/Wild 2 back to Earth, provided only a snapshot. In the case of the space probe Stardust, which raced past its comet in 2004, the dust had changed significantly during capture, so that a quantitative analysis was only possible to a limited extent.

In the course of the Rosetta mission, COSIMA collected more than 35000 dust grains. The smallest of them measured only 0.01 millimeters in diameter, the largest about one millimeter. The instrument makes it possible to first observe the individual dust grains with a microscope. In a second step, these grains are bombarded with a high-energy beam of indium ions. The secondary ions emitted in this way can then be "weighed" and analyzed in the COSIMA mass spectrometer. For the current study, the researchers limited themselves to 30 dust grains with properties that ensured a meaningful analysis. Their selection includes from all phases of the Rosetta mission and of all sizes.

"Our analyzes show that the composition of all these grains is very similar," MPS researcher Dr. Martin Hilchenbach, Principal Investigator of the COSIMA team, describes the results. The scientists conclude that the comet's dust consists of the same "ingredients" as the comet's nucleus and thus can be examined in its place.

Researchers present list of comet 67P/Churyumov-Gerasimenko ingredients
Left: Overview of the chemical elements that make up Rosetta’s comet. Right: Average mass distribution of organic and mineral substances in Rosetta’s comet. Credit: © ESA / Rosetta / MPS for COSIMA Team MPS / CSNSM / UNIBW / TUORLA / IWF / IAS / ESA / BUW / MPE / LPC2E / LCM / IMF / UTU / LISA / UOFC / vH & S.

As the study shows, are among those ingredients at the top of the list. These account for about 45 percent of the weight of the solid . "Rosetta's comet thus belongs to the most carbon-rich bodies we know in the solar system," says MPS scientist and COSIMA team member Dr. Oliver Stenzel. The other part of the total weight, about 55 percent, is provided by mineral substances, mainly silicates. It is striking that they are almost exclusively non-hydrated minerals i.e. missing water compounds.

"Of course, Rosetta's comet contains water like any other comet, too," says Hilchenbach. "But because comets have spent most of their time at the icy rim of the solar system, it has almost always been frozen and could not react with the minerals." The researchers therefore regard the lack of hydrated minerals in the comet's as an indication that 67P contains very pristine material.

This conclusion is supported by the ratio of certain elements such as carbon to silicon. With more than 5, this value is very close to the Sun's value, which is thought to reflect the ratio found in the early solar system.

The current findings also touch on our ideas of how life on Earth came about. In a previous publication, the COSIMA team was able to show that the carbon found in Rosetta's is mainly in the form of large, organic macromolecules. Together with the current study, it becomes clear that these compounds make up a large part of the cometary material. Thus, if comets indeed supplied the early Earth with organic matter, as many researchers assume, it would probably have been mainly in the form of such macromolecules.

Explore further: Rosetta catches dusty organics

More information: Anaïs Bardyn et al. Carbon-rich dust in comet 67P/Churyumov-Gerasimenko measured by COSIMA/Rosetta, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society (2017). DOI: 10.1093/mnras/stx2640

Related Stories

Rosetta catches dusty organics

September 8, 2016

Rosetta's dust-analysing COSIMA (COmetary Secondary Ion Mass Analyser) instrument has made the first unambiguous detection of solid organic matter in the dust particles ejected by Comet 67P/Churyumov-Gerasimenko, in the form ...

ROSINA spectral measurements bring comet's chemistry to life

November 1, 2017

Launched March 2004 and following a 10-year journey across the solar system, the European Space Agency's Rosetta probe made history in 2014. It became the first spacecraft to orbit the nucleus of a comet—a frozen remnant ...

Recommended for you

InSight lander 'hears' Martian winds

December 7, 2018

NASA's Interior Exploration using Seismic Investigations, Geodesy and Heat Transport InSight lander, which touched down on Mars just 10 days ago, has provided the first ever "sounds" of Martian winds on the Red Planet. A ...

An exoplanet loses its atmosphere in the form of a tail

December 6, 2018

A new study led by scientists from the Instituto de Astrofísica de Canarias (IAC) reveals that the giant exoplanet WASP-69b carries a comet-like tail made up of helium particles escaping from its gravitational field and ...

77 comments

Adjust slider to filter visible comments by rank

Display comments: newest first

cantdrive85
1 / 5 (9) Dec 01, 2017
It is striking that they are almost exclusively non-hydrated minerals i.e. missing water compounds.

'Dirty snowball' fail once again! Seems as if all the water is in the coma, after it is created by the electrochemical reactions
andyf
5 / 5 (13) Dec 01, 2017
CD85: Looks like you didn't make it as far as the next paragraph. You really should try harder.
Maggnus
4.6 / 5 (9) Dec 02, 2017
He read that, and it was enough to reinforce his previously determined bias. cantthink is determined to never learn or grow.
jonesdave
4 / 5 (8) Dec 02, 2017
It is striking that they are almost exclusively non-hydrated minerals i.e. missing water compounds.

'Dirty snowball' fail once again! Seems as if all the water is in the coma, after it is created by the electrochemical reactions


Lol. So finding a bunch of water vapour in the comae of numerous comets, and solid ice at quite a few, is 'failing' is it? Nope, look up the meaning of the word 'failure', and you'll find that the definition is 'electric comet woo'. Which has been a spectacular, if not surprising failure.
Mark Thomas
not rated yet Dec 02, 2017
"Researchers present list of comet (67P) ingredients"

I expected at least a mention of the breathable, molecular oxygen found pouring out of 67P in this article. The number of comets in the solar system is often estimated in the trillions, so one might be tempted to ask just how much breathable oxygen is stored in comets.

http://adsabs.har...26..678B
cantdrive85
1 / 5 (8) Dec 02, 2017
"Researchers present list of comet (67P) ingredients"

I expected at least a mention of the breathable, molecular oxygen found pouring out of 67P in this article. The number of comets in the solar system is often estimated in the trillions, so one might be tempted to ask just how much breathable oxygen is stored in comets.

http://adsabs.har...26..678B

Shhhh! Don't mention that MT, it gives reason to falsify the dirty snowball nonsense. That oxygen along with the plentiful amounts of H in the comet and solar wind along with a little electrochemistry provides a source for the water and ices jonesdumb keeps harping about. Without mentioning that they can make claims such as;
"Of course, Rosetta's comet contains water like any other comet, too,"
...regardless of the fact the surface of the comet is a desiccated dry wasteland with only very small patches of water ices most likely due to condensation.
rrwillsj
4.3 / 5 (6) Dec 02, 2017
cd8, what recent, physical evidence do you offer for verification of your claim that the surface of comets consist of a 'dry wasteland'?

So Prohibition is still enforced in outer space? Sounds like yet another reason I wouldn't want to go!

Unless any readers can provide the secret knock to a speakeasy on Callisto?
jonesdave
3.7 / 5 (9) Dec 02, 2017
Shhhh! Don't mention that MT, it gives reason to falsify the dirty snowball nonsense. That oxygen along with the plentiful amounts of H in the comet and solar wind along with a little electrochemistry..


Lol. No, it can't. I asked you how this was happening in the thread on 45P. You have yet to describe it. Try again. Bear in mind that the solar wind is getting nowhere near the nucleus for about a year. And that the H2O production rate at peak was ~ 10^28 mol/s. Also bear in mind that an impact blasted solid ice grains off of a comet. And that another comet was surrounded by icy grains. Big buggers, too: https://science.n...nowstorm
Please describe this 'electrochemical' process in detail, with the requisite maths and chemistry. Not going to happen, is it?

jonesdave
3.5 / 5 (8) Dec 02, 2017
"Researchers present list of comet (67P) ingredients"

I expected at least a mention of the breathable, molecular oxygen found pouring out of 67P in this article. The number of comets in the solar system is often estimated in the trillions, so one might be tempted to ask just how much breathable oxygen is stored in comets.

http://adsabs.har...26..678B


There have been quite a few papers on the O2. This paper, however, is from the COSIMA instrument team. That is an instrument that analyses dust, not gas.
andyf
5 / 5 (5) Dec 02, 2017
CT85 is another demented plonker.
cantdrive85
1 / 5 (6) Dec 02, 2017
This is not only relevant for jonesdumb but also rrwillis;
https://phys.org/...oud.html
H in the coma no water on surface.
andyf
5 / 5 (7) Dec 02, 2017
CT85, your link doesn't even mention 'H in the coma',

but I did spot:
'Jets of dust released by vaporizing ice are the most obvious features to emerge.'

Just how is this supposed to support your case? Did you even read the article you linked to?

Come on CT, this is poor even for a demented plonker.
cantdrive85
1 / 5 (3) Dec 02, 2017
Silly me, wrong link.
https://phys.org/...ary.html
jonesdave
3.5 / 5 (8) Dec 02, 2017
This is not only relevant for jonesdumb but also rrwillis;
https://phys.org/...oud.html
H in the coma no water on surface.


Not even wrong! There has been plenty of ice seen on the surface, including CO2 ice. And plenty of gases in the coma. All seen at distances that are within the distance that the solar wind is reaching around perihelion (> 1500 km). The neutral H is many kilometers from the nucleus, and is from the breakdown of H2O. That is why it isn't seen close to the nucleus, but H2O is. Not had time to be photoionized. That article is about dust, FFS!
The first reports of the detection of H2O (possibly from VIRTIS) saw it at 0- 500m from the surface. Given that H2O expands at ~ 600m/s, that means in EU terms, it has to form in less than 1 second. How?
Now, how is the electrochemistry going? Need a hand?
jonesdave
3.5 / 5 (8) Dec 02, 2017
Silly me, wrong link.
https://phys.org/...ary.html


Lol. From Sept. 2014, just weeks after arrival at > 3 AU! Have a look in the literature. Google Scholar. Input: Rosetta; 67P; ice. See what comes back.
andyf
5 / 5 (6) Dec 02, 2017
Silly me, wrong link.
https://phys.org/...ary.html


A silly demented plonker.

QED.
cantdrive85
1.7 / 5 (6) Dec 02, 2017
Like I said, very limited surface ice, likely due to condensation.
jonesdave
3.3 / 5 (7) Dec 02, 2017
Like I said, very limited surface ice, likely due to condensation.


Condensation of what? Lol. Here, read these:

The diurnal cycle of water ice on comet 67P/Churyumov–Gerasimenko
https://www.natur...ure14869

Rosetta's comet 67P/Churyumov-Gerasimenko sheds its dusty mantle to reveal its icy nature
http://science.sc...319/1566

Exposed water ice on the nucleus of comet 67P/Churyumov–Gerasimenko
https://www.natur...ure16190

Detection of exposed H2O ice on the nucleus of comet 67P/Churyumov-Gerasimenko
https://www.aanda...-16.html

Seasonal exposure of carbon dioxide ice on the nucleus of comet 67P/Churyumov-Gerasimenko
http://science.sc...319/1563

The pristine interior of comet 67P revealed by the combined Aswan outburst and cliff collapse
http://adsabs.har....1E..92P

jonesdave
3.5 / 5 (8) Dec 02, 2017
^^^^And when you add to that the solid ice grains ejected from the Tempel 1 impact, and the big chunks of it floating around Hartley 2, and ice grains detected at 17P Holmes after an outburst, then I'm afraid that subsurface ice is a done deal. The electric comet woo is dead. Has been for yonks.
cantdrive85
1.8 / 5 (5) Dec 02, 2017
The diurnal cycle of water ice on comet 67P/Churyumov–Gerasimenko

"Observations of cometary nuclei have revealed a very limited amount of surface water ice which is insufficient to explain the observed water outgassing. This was clearly demonstrated on comet 9P/Tempel 1, where the dust jets (driven by volatiles) were only partially correlated with the exposed ice regions8. The observations of 67P have revealed that activity has a diurnal variation in intensity arising from changing insolation conditions. ..Periodic condensations of water vapour very close to, or on, the surface....,"

LOL! Just what I said...
jonesdave
3.3 / 5 (7) Dec 02, 2017
^^^^Idiot. It's condensing from below! When it is warm enough at depth, the ice sublimates and escapes through the surface. As things become cooler, the gas is frozen at the surface until it becomes warm enough to start sublimating again. Not rocket science. The main point being that the gas comes from BELOW. Which is where the ice is known to be. When a cliff collapses, what does the subsurface consist of? See the last link I provided. What do the 'boulders' from the collapse exhibit? See another of the papers. When you smash an impactor into an area that shows no surface ice, what comes out? When you see vigorous CO2 jets entraining water ice grains, where is it coming from? Et cetera.
cantdrive85
1.5 / 5 (8) Dec 02, 2017
sheds its dusty mantle


"Filacchione et al. detected the spectral signature of solid CO2 (dry ice) in ***small patches*** on the surface of the nucleus as they emerged from local winter. By modeling how the CO2 sublimates, they constrain the composition of comets and how ices generate the gaseous coma and tail. Fornasier et al. studied images of the comet and discovered bright patches on the surface where ice was exposed, which disappeared as the ice sublimated. They also saw frost emerging from receding shadows."
"as increasing activity removed the surface dust, ***implying*** that water ice is widespread underneath the surface. We identified large (1500 square meters) ice-rich patches appearing and then vanishing in about 10 days, indicating small-scale heterogeneities on the nucleus. Thin frosts sublimating in a few minutes are observed close to receding shadows..."
Assumptions leading to conclusions ehich could also be indicating condensation.
cantdrive85
1.5 / 5 (8) Dec 02, 2017
Exposed water ice on the nucleus of comet


"Although water vapour is the main species observed in the coma of comet 67P/Churyumov–Gerasimenko1,2 and water is the major constituent of cometary nuclei3,4, limited evidence for exposed water-ice regions on the surface of the nucleus has been found so far5,6. The absence of large regions of exposed water ice seems a common finding on the surfaces of many of the comets observed so far7,8,9. The nucleus of 67P/Churyumov–Gerasimenko appears to be fairly uniformly coated with dark, dehydrated, refractory and organic-rich material...Although micrometre-sized water-ice grains are the usual result of vapour recondensation in ice-free layers..."

ROTFLMAO!
Dark, dehydrared material....
Once again, the limited areas of exposed water ice could just as easily be explained by condensation, they are trying very hard to save a failed guess.
jonesdave
3.5 / 5 (8) Dec 02, 2017
Assumptions leading to conclusions ehich could also be indicating condensation.


Jesus. What an idiot. The CO2 ice is directly observed. What is it condensing from??????? Honestly, it's like dealing with a 5 year old.
jonesdave
3.3 / 5 (7) Dec 02, 2017
Once again, the limited areas of exposed water ice could just as easily be explained by condensation, they are trying very hard to save a failed guess.


Condensing from what, you idiot?

Da Schneib
5 / 5 (3) Dec 02, 2017
This is ridiculous. Water doesn't condense from open space.
cantdrive85
1 / 5 (6) Dec 02, 2017
Can any of you morons read? The linked papers acknowledge condensation of water vapor on the surface as a source of detected water ice. You are correct, it is like dealing with autistic crack smoking moronic 5-year-olds, all of y'all!
jonesdave
3.5 / 5 (8) Dec 02, 2017
This is ridiculous. Water doesn't condense from open space.


Nor does it form from a non-existent solar wind (around perihelion), smashing into non-existent O- to somehow form H2O! Which is what the idiot Thornhill is telling his scientifically illiterate followers. Who, being scientifically illiterate, fall for such crap. And they think this idiocy, with its never seen radial electric field, its never seen EDM (lol), its never seen electric discharges, and its undetectable rock, is somehow superior to actual scientific observation!
Psychology is the only interesting thing going on here.
jonesdave
3.3 / 5 (7) Dec 02, 2017
Can any of you morons read? The linked papers acknowledge condensation of water vapor on the surface as a source of detected water ice. You are correct, it is like dealing with autistic crack smoking moronic 5-year-olds, all of y'all!


Can you not read, you idiot? It is condensing from below. Where is it coming from? Jesus, how thick can you be? It isn't condensing from above is it? So where is H2O coming from below the surface?
andyf
5 / 5 (5) Dec 02, 2017
Yep, CT85 has now joined the andyf list of confirmed demented plonkers.

Let's hear a round of applause for CT85.
cantdrive85
1 / 5 (3) Dec 02, 2017
It is condensing from below. Where is it coming from?


"...Periodic condensations of water vapour very close to, or on, the surface....,"

As I said, autistic crack smoking moronic 5-year-olds...
Da Schneib
not rated yet Dec 02, 2017
@cantthink69 will keep making stuff up like water condensing out of open space as long as you continue to pay attention to it.
jonesdave
3 / 5 (6) Dec 02, 2017
It is condensing from below. Where is it coming from?


"...Periodic condensations of water vapour very close to, or on, the surface....,"

As I said, autistic crack smoking moronic 5-year-olds...


Jesus H. Christ! How many frigging times? Yes, it is condensing from below, you loon. It will travel toward the surface, and then freeze out on or near the surface (i.e. just below it). How bloody difficult can this be?

Let me make this simple for the hard of thinking; the bloody H2O observed is high tailing it at ~ 600 m/s away from the comet. It isn't bloody well heading back around to condense on the surface again, is it? What is the escape velocity? Strewth.
cantdrive85
1.7 / 5 (6) Dec 02, 2017
Hey da schnied magnetic monople guy (speaking of making things up), that is a direct quote from one of jonesdumb linked papers. The vapor is condensing from the coma where the water vapor/ices are being electrochemically created.
jonesdave
3 / 5 (6) Dec 02, 2017
Hey da schnied magnetic monople guy (speaking of making things up), that is a direct quote from one of jonesdumb linked papers. The vapor is condensing from the coma where the water vapor/ices are being electrochemically created.


No, they are not electrochemically created. Impossible. If not, explain how it happens.
cantdrive85
1 / 5 (4) Dec 02, 2017

Jesus H. Christ! How many frigging times? Yes, it is condensing from below, you loon. It will travel toward the surface, and then freeze out on or near the surface (i.e. just below it). How bloody difficult can this be?

You are just making shit up, the papers are quite clear on this, got that autistic crack smoking moron.
cantdrive85
1.8 / 5 (5) Dec 02, 2017
The water is created at or near the surface due to the electric discharge, as was pointed out prior. Add O+H2 and a spark or heat and you have water. Since it is cold the larger molecules will freeze and form ice.
jonesdave
3.3 / 5 (7) Dec 02, 2017

You are just making shit up, the papers are quite clear on this, got that autistic crack smoking moron.


No, I'm not making it up idiot.

Thus, within the few centimetres affected by the heat exchange,
water vapour still produced by subsurface sublimation in the warmer
subsurface layers flows through the pores and could re-condense if the
thermo-physical conditions of the colder upper surface layer allow it.
By this mechanism the surface layer becomes enriched in water ice.
The water ice in the uppermost surface layers will be stable until a new
cycle of solar illumination starts which will increase the surface tem-
perature and thus trigger again the outgassing of water from the comet


https://www.natur...ure14869

Which is what I told you, and you completely failed to understand.
Da Schneib
5 / 5 (2) Dec 02, 2017
Since it is cold the larger molecules
What "larger molecules?" There's only one kind of water molecule. It's made from two hydrogen atoms and one oxygen atom. They're all the same size.

Like I said, just making stuff up.
jonesdave
3 / 5 (6) Dec 02, 2017
The water is created at or near the surface due to the electric discharge, as was pointed out prior. Add O+H2 and a spark or heat and you have water. Since it is cold the larger molecules will freeze and form ice.


There are no electric discharges. They would be bloody obvious. There is no O near the surface, and no H2. You are just making crap up. Christ, what a pile of pseudoscientific woo.
andyf
5 / 5 (3) Dec 02, 2017
Seems unnecessarily complicated to me. O and H are more than happy to react with each other giving off heat. Why do you need
a spark or heat
to make it work?
cantdrive85
1.8 / 5 (5) Dec 02, 2017

No, I'm not making it up idiot.

Thus, within the few centimetres affected by the heat exchange,
water vapour still produced by subsurface sublimation in the warmer
subsurface layers flows through the pores and could re-condense if the
thermo-physical conditions of the colder upper surface layer allow it.
By this mechanism the surface layer becomes enriched in water ice.
The water ice in the uppermost surface layers will be stable until a new
cycle of solar illumination starts which will increase the surface tem-
perature and thus trigger again the outgassing of water from the comet

https://www.natur...ure14869

Which is what I told you, and you completely failed to understand.

IF there is subsurface water ice, still conjecture. There is in fact coma water vapor though.
Da Schneib
5 / 5 (2) Dec 02, 2017
@andy it's this "Electric Wooniverse" thing they have going. You should see the web sites. It will remind you of the timecube site if you've ever seen that.
cantdrive85
1 / 5 (3) Dec 02, 2017
@andy it's this "Electric Wooniverse" thing they have going. You should see the web sites. It will remind you of the timecube site if you've ever seen that.

Coming from the guy of the magnetic looneyverse with monopoles as a fundamental phenomenon. LOL
andyf
5 / 5 (4) Dec 02, 2017
@DS, I sort of gathered that but why do these plonkers commit their on-line existences to propping up such idiotic bollocks? Where do they get their bonus?
cantdrive85
1.7 / 5 (6) Dec 02, 2017
What "larger molecules?" There's only one kind of water molecule.

Sorry, a chain of them, a conglomeration of molecules which will form ices.
jonesdave
3.3 / 5 (7) Dec 02, 2017
IF there is subsurface water ice, still conjecture. There is in fact coma water vapor though.


There IS. Indisputably. Cliffs collapse and we see......oh, forget it, I did that a few posts up.

Here, look at all the pretty ice:
https://smd-prod....trip.jpg
jonesdave
3 / 5 (6) Dec 02, 2017
What "larger molecules?" There's only one kind of water molecule.

Sorry, a chain of them, a conglomeration of molecules which will form ices.


And what is causing them to 'conglomerate'? Lol. Irrelevant, as it isn't happening. No electric woo. What would a spark do anyway? This isn't 1 atmosphere of pressure, eh? It's a bloody vacuum. Scientifically impossible woo.
Captain Stumpy
5 / 5 (3) Dec 02, 2017
@andyf
...why do these plonkers commit their on-line existences to propping up such idiotic bollocks? Where do they get their bonus?
the bonus is actually in the telling - its similar to addiction

because there is no actual requirement for evidence, just a faith in the leadership, then the acolyte is taught to repeat dogma - so a religious fanatic has to be able to share the dogma in order to reinforce it in their mind that their belief is legitimate

This is the reason you see them repeat the same tired argument repeatedly regardless of the overwhelming evidence refuting their claims

the less intelligent are the ones who stick with it regardless of the evidence proving them wrong - the critical thinkers are the ones who realise they've been taken to the cleaners (though some of the latter will continue to proselytize to justify their cost)
Da Schneib
5 / 5 (3) Dec 02, 2017
a chain of them
See? It just makes up more woo. Tolja. Now we got water woo: "chains" of water molecules. You can buy woo water that claims to be made up of these. It's only ten times as expensive as regular bottled water.
andyf
5 / 5 (5) Dec 02, 2017
@CS

Sounds like a substitute for religion to me.

Perhaps I could sneak in the back door and take it over and give them a serious dose of Calvinism. That should get them back into line.

tee-he
cantdrive85
1.8 / 5 (5) Dec 02, 2017
There IS. Indisputably. Cliffs collapse and we see......oh, forget it, I did that a few posts up.

It still can be disputed, cliff collapse is inferred/assumed. There is no debris field near the "collapse". Discharge is still quite applicable and can also explain the presence of the water ices. The collapse guess is grasping at straws to save the failed dirty snowball nonsense.

And what is causing them to 'conglomerate'?

Water molecules, even vapor, are dipoles...
cantdrive85
1.8 / 5 (5) Dec 02, 2017
Now we got water woo: "chains" of water molecules.


http://ieeexplore...4287052/
Captain Stumpy
5 / 5 (5) Dec 02, 2017
@andyf
@CS

Sounds like a substitute for religion to me.
it absolutely is a substitute for religion
Perhaps I could sneak in the back door and take it over and give them a serious dose of Calvinism. That should get them back into line.

tee-he
ROTFLMFAO
andyf
5 / 5 (5) Dec 02, 2017
@CS

Cheers! and I've got the beard and long white hair already! Calvinistic Woo is go!!!
jonesdave
3.5 / 5 (8) Dec 02, 2017
It still can be disputed, cliff collapse is inferred/assumed. There is no debris field near the "collapse".


Wrong. Cliff collapse was seen. They see the fracture before it collapses, and then they see the fresh interior after the collapse along that fracture. And they also see the debris field. And they have spectroscopically investigated talus deposits from below cliffs. And they see ice. What we don't see is any kind of electric woo on the nucleus.

jonesdave
3.7 / 5 (9) Dec 02, 2017
Da Schneib
5 / 5 (3) Dec 02, 2017
Unfortunately the link to the IEEE, which I'm not exactly all stoked over given some of the crap I've seen their "peer review" let by, doesn't work.

So now we got water woo "supported" by articles no one can read. This is typical for @cantthink69 and the Eclectic Wooniverse mob.
jonesdave
3.3 / 5 (7) Dec 02, 2017
Unfortunately the link to the IEEE, which I'm not exactly all stoked over given some of the crap I've seen their "peer review" let by, doesn't work.

So now we got water woo "supported" by articles no one can read. This is typical for @cantthink69 and the Eclectic Wooniverse mob.


Don't worry about it. It is nothing to do with water. The paper is entitled:
Electrodynamic Aggregation of Nanodust as a Source of Long-Lived Filaments in Laboratory Electric Discharges and Space

Bugger all to do with what CD was inventing.
Da Schneib
5 / 5 (3) Dec 02, 2017
So what we actually have here is @cantthink69 posting a link to something irrelevant.

No surprise, but I'd have expected a little more actual, I dunno, spunk or something.
rrwillsj
4 / 5 (4) Dec 03, 2017
The EU whoopsie gave been claiming that only they, with their magical Emerald City glasses and brass spirit horns. Can see the magical lightning and hear the magical thunder in outer space. That all the rest of us have been ignorant of.

And now there is magical invisible rain across a vacuum. Best you take your brolly, mate.
Maggnus
4.2 / 5 (5) Dec 03, 2017
So what we actually have here is @cantthink69 posting a link to something irrelevant.

No surprise, but I'd have expected a little more actual, I dunno, spunk or something.


That's funny!! :)
cantdrive85
1 / 5 (4) Dec 03, 2017
Electric discharge experiments, material erosion and displacement without arc discharge.
https://youtu.be/3JDXtJ13vl0
cantdrive85
1 / 5 (4) Dec 03, 2017
'The History of the Electric Comet' (it is not new), four parts so far;
Intro
https://www.thund...duction/
Part 2
https://www.thund...-part-2/
Part 3
https://www.thund...-part-3/
Part 4
https://www.thund...-part-4/

PTTG
5 / 5 (3) Dec 03, 2017
"The dust that comet 67P/Churyumov-Gerasimenko emits into space consists to about one half of organic molecules."

That copyediting is just depressing. It's the first sentence in the article for christsakes!
jonesdave
3.3 / 5 (7) Dec 04, 2017
Electric discharge experiments, material erosion and displacement without arc discharge.
https://youtu.be/3JDXtJ13vl0


Who cares about electric discharge experiments? Such things have never been seen at comets, and there is no sane person who believes that they could happen.
jonesdave
3.3 / 5 (7) Dec 04, 2017
'The History of the Electric Comet' (it is not new), four parts so far;
Intro
https://www.thund...duction/



So what? A history of a failed model, that hardly anybody has heard of, and even fewer people ever believed. It is an irrelevance.
rrwillsj
4 / 5 (4) Dec 04, 2017
Now the EU Whoohooie traveling medicine show is seeing invisible trees growing on comets?

It would make sense if you consider that, on the Earth's surface, in the Earth's atmosphere, Earth weather produced lightning has an inconvenient attraction to trees.

Wait! No, no. Not a lick of sense involved with the EU Whoohooper's.

Man. it's bad enough cutting timber in foul-weather gear. I can't even begin to imagine lumbering in a spacesuit!
Da Schneib
5 / 5 (2) Dec 04, 2017
@rrwillsj, presented for your contemplation:
https://www.youtu...gMuoFnXs
https://www.youtu...376Ksyyk

aaLL yOuRE foReSt arE bELOjng tU Us
cantdrive85
1 / 5 (5) Dec 04, 2017
No "sane" person could believe that electrons and protons would interact with solid bodies in space....
You truly are a moron!
cantdrive85
1 / 5 (5) Dec 04, 2017
jonesdumb says;
Who cares about experiments?


Obviously you don't, but still claim the high road of science. Laughable!
cantdrive85
1 / 5 (5) Dec 04, 2017
jonesdumb's attitude toward laboratory experiments is akin to Sidney Chapman's attitude that led him to believe he could ignore and disparage Birkeland's Terella experiments which led to an accurate theory and predictions of Earth's aurora. Chapman was exactly wrong. The irony is Birkeland's experiments and theory are directly relatable to comet theory. It will be shown jonesdumb is also exactly wrong.
jonesdave
3.3 / 5 (7) Dec 04, 2017
jonesdumb's attitude toward laboratory experiments is akin to Sidney Chapman's attitude that led him to believe he could ignore and disparage Birkeland's Terella experiments which led to an accurate theory and predictions of Earth's aurora. Chapman was exactly wrong. The irony is Birkeland's experiments and theory are directly relatable to comet theory. It will be shown jonesdumb is also exactly wrong.


Dickhead. Where is your evidence? Had a spacecraft around a comet for 2+ years. Loony tunes. Where is the evidence?
jonesdave
3 / 5 (6) Dec 04, 2017
No "sane" person could believe that electrons and protons would interact with solid bodies in space....
You truly are a moron!


Jesus. What a wan*er! Please explain what that means in real English. Cretin.
jonesdave
3 / 5 (6) Dec 04, 2017
jonesdumb says;
Who cares about experiments?


Obviously you don't, but still claim the high road of science. Laughable!


Hey, dickhead, how about actual evidence? Got any? No, of course not. Cretin. Just more scientifically illiterate woo, straight from the pages of the tosspot Thornhill. Yes? Think that is going to convince anybody with an IQ over 100? Errrrrrrr. nahhhhhhhh. Dick. Your electric comet idiocy is long dead. Nobody ever took it seriously. It is lolworthy. Lol.
cantdrive85
1 / 5 (2) Dec 04, 2017
Not only does the inept jonesdumb eschew real science (experiments), but he also resorts to lowbrow vulgarity of a meathead.

rrwillsj
1 / 5 (1) Dec 05, 2017
DS, thanks for the heads up. https://www.youtu...gMuoFnXs Terrific clip of modern lumberroboting. Sure wish we had that kind of gear back in my misspent youth. Ohh my aching back!

https://www.youtu...376Ksyyk was a fail, traps you in commercials for dubious EU products.

Please sign in to add a comment. Registration is free, and takes less than a minute. Read more

Click here to reset your password.
Sign in to get notified via email when new comments are made.