The “Surprisingly” Dark Comet Chury

originally posted by: AnarchoCapitalist
a reply to: eriktheawful

hahaha I love this place.

If the comet is gigantic icy rock that emits a gigantic coma and tail, along with x-rays, why doesn't the Earth do the same thing?

We have polar caps, right?

The Earth emits neutral atoms into space, right?

So according to the standard model, if we launched an iceberg into space, it would emit x-rays, right?

Also, if comets are emitting neutral atoms all the time, why do they only emit x-rays some of the time, rather than all of the time?

Why don't all comets emit x-rays all of the time?

Earth does emit X-Rays.

So does the moon. And Venus. And Mars. And Jupiter.....

You know, if you're going to try and be an "expert" in a field, and you're going to try to "prove" all the scientist in the world wrong.....you might want to actually educate yourself first.

Because, by making some of the statements you make, you come off as someone who thinks they are sounding intelligent, but instead reveal themselves as being very ignorant about things.

Take a read:

Chandra X-Ray Observatory

Actually LEARN about the standard models first and UNDERSTAND them. Then you can come here and have an intelligent conversation. Instead of spouting off things that are not true.

I believe it's Phage that has in his signature a quote from Mark Twain:

"Get your facts first, then you can distort them as you please."

And you should do that. Get your facts first, instead of coming here and making false statements.

a reply to: eriktheawful

It's really pointless to argue with him.

He has flat out said every comet shape proves EU correct.

He has said comets do not have low density, and if they do EU can explain it.

He has said Philae will bounce off, and if it doesn't he's still right.

He can't be wrong because every outcome is proof he is right.

originally posted by: AnarchoCapitalist
a reply to: wildespace

Whether the comet is a rock, an icy dirtball or a dirty snowball - explain to me how such an object could emit x-rays simply because it's in space getting hit by the solar wind.

www.universetoday.com...

Energetic solar wind ions impact the coma, capturing electrons from neutral atoms. As the electrons become attached to their new parent nuclei (the solar wind ion), energy is released in the form of X-rays. As the coma can measure several thousand miles in diameter, the comet atmosphere has a huge cross section, allowing a vast number of these charge exchange events to occur. Comets suddenly become significant X-ray generators as they get blasted by solar wind ions. The total power output from the coma can top a billion Watts.

chandra.harvard.edu...

On July 14, 2000 NASA's Chandra X-ray Observatory imaged Comet C/1999 S4 (LINEAR) and detected X-rays from oxygen and nitrogen ions. The details of the X-ray emission, as recorded on Chandra's Advanced CCD Imaging Spectrometer, show that they are produced by collisions of ions racing away from the Sun with gas in the comet.

[...]

Chandra's imaging spectrometer revealed a strong X-ray signal from oxygen and nitrogen ions, clinching the case for the production of X-rays due to the exchange of electrons in collisions between nitrogen and oxygen ions in the solar wind and electrically neutral elements (predominantly hydrogen) in the comets atmosphere.

a reply to: eriktheawful

The Earth doesn't emit a gigantic glowing coma and tail that lights up in the x-ray spectrum, nice try though. You're very good at changing the context of my points to avoid them.

originally posted by: AnarchoCapitalist
a reply to: eriktheawful

The Earth doesn't emit a gigantic glowing coma and tail that lights up in the x-ray spectrum, nice try though. You're very good at changing the context of my points to avoid them.

Of course it doesn't. It's a planet. Not a comet. That's comparing apples to oranges.

Something you tend to try to do all the time.

However, you made a flat statement that was one hundred percent untrue: that Earth doesn't emit X-rays.

I didn't take anything out of context. I corrected misinformation you put out. Something else you seem to do a lot.

And, of course, as you ALWAYS do: you can't admit you were wrong about something. You ALWAYS do that. You either deflect, change the subject, or just refuse to answer. Another telling piece of information about EU people, as they always do that when it comes to this subject.

All anyone has to do is go back and take a look at all the ISON threads. EU people predicted something, and it didn't happen. When that was pointed out, it was ignored. Another prediction made about ISON. It didn't happen. After being pointed out, again, it was ignored. That went on over and over right up until ISON was destroyed by the sun...and even after THAT, EU people STILL tried so desperately to make things fit, and ignored the reality that was pointed out for days afterwards.

Then suddenly, they all became very quiet.

Now here is a new comet! Same old predictions however by the EU crowd. And again, things that contradict what they say are ignored or deflected.

:shrug:

This time will be no different. And when things do not go their way, the EU crowd will do two things:

Scream: CONSPIRACY!!!!

or

Go quiet again.......until the next comet.

a reply to: eriktheawful

You still haven't explained why the difference in size creates different outcomes.

So what if the Earth is a planet.

Why should a piece of a planet, like an iceberg, light up like a christmas tree when launched into space, but the planet itself does not?

First of all, let's try to keep this thread civil and focused on science rather than on persons involved.

originally posted by: AnarchoCapitalist
a reply to: eriktheawful

You still haven't explained why the difference in size creates different outcomes.

So what if the Earth is a planet.

Why should a piece of a planet, like an iceberg, light up like a christmas tree when launched into space, but the planet itself does not?

Luckily, Earth has a strong magnetic field and a thick atmosphere, which prevents its ices from sublimating directly into space. It also has a strong gravity, which keeps its gasses mostly close to the surface.

Comets have none of that, which is why their ices create an extremely large coma which is subjected to direct solar wind and solar radiation.

Take away the Earth's magnetic field, and it would probably develop a "tail" like Venus does, being also battered by the Sun's wind and magnetic fields: www.youtube.com...

originally posted by: AnarchoCapitalist
a reply to: eriktheawful

You still haven't explained why the difference in size creates different outcomes.

So what if the Earth is a planet.

Why should a piece of a planet, like an iceberg, light up like a christmas tree when launched into space, but the planet itself does not?

Wildespace answered your question, in part, but enough to show that there are MAJOR differences between planets and comets.

Our Earth has a molten iron core that spins rapidly, covered with a elastic mantle of rock, followed by a thin, ridged crust. It has a thin (thin compared to the rest of the volume of the Earth) layer of water, and an atmosphere who's pressure is greater than any gases that might be around a comet.

Those gases are kept by the Earth due to gravity. The Earth's mass is much more than that of a comet, and because of that you experience 32 feet/sec^2 gravitational acceleration while walking around on the surface of the Earth.

Now wrap our planet around in some very large magnetic fields that are generated by the core, and you end up deflecting the majority of the solar wind.

When we take a look at Venus, who's magnetic field is no longer there, and you can see that it's atmosphere is being streamed into space by the sun. Mars has a very weak and sporatic field, and it to has had it's atmosphere streamed into space.

And guess what? When Chandra X-Ray observatory looks at Venus and Mars? They both look like a bright light bulb when it comes to x-rays.

waiting for the press release any moment now..
ROSETTA.. (lulz)
..project director matt taylor has some interesting tattoos there

ok, it landed..
/shrug
now nothing will happen for a while then something will happen
..they just said something interesting about the mission focus; "water"
and the end bit "..we can only do it by working together" (international effort)
nice touch
now some swiss space guy has come on the mic' (say, that's an interesting lapel)
oh, they've just cut him off for some reason..
back to the news-shills, who are on about 'water' & 'organic molecules' once more..
(ok, uhh, i think i can see where this is all meant to be going?)
news guy: "now, let's turn to syria"
/shrug
i'm still keen on seeing those tattoos again..

Other analyses suggest the comet's surface is largely water-ice covered with a thin dust layer.

www.bbc.com...

BOOM. Bye.