It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
TextOther ancient reports in the West are found in the writings of Pausanius, Plutarch, Livy, Pindar, Valerius Maximus, Caesar, and many others. The report of a great fall of black dust at Constantinople in 472 BC, perhaps the result of a high-altitude airburst, is documented by Procopius, Ammianus Marcellinus, Theophanes, and others. Colonel S. P. Worden has called to my attention the following passage in The History of the Franks, written by Bishop Gregory of Tours: "580 AD in Louraine, one morning before the dawning of the day, a great light was seen crossing the heavens, falling toward the east. A sound like that of a tree crashing down was heard over all the countryside, but it could surely not have been any tree, since it was heard more than fifty miles away... the city of Bordeaux was badly shaken by an earthquake ... a supernatural fire burned down villages about Bordeaux. It took hold so rapidly that houses and even threshing- floors with all their grain were burned to ashes. Since there was absolutely no other visible cause of the fire, it must have happened by divine will. The city of Orleans also burned with so great a fire that even the rich lost almost everything."
Originally posted by PuterMan
reply to post by C.H.U.D.
Cometary material on the other hand is usually no where near as dense, and in some cases of similar consistency as cigarette ash.
Really. I defy you to prove that statement in light of recent evidence.
Based upon photographic fireball studies, cometary meteoroids have extremely low densities, about 0.8 grams/cc for class IIIA fireballs, and 0.3 grams/cc for class IIIB fireballs. This composition is very fragile and vaporizes so readily when entering the atmosphere, that it is called “friable” material. These meteoroids have virtually no chance of making it to the ground unless an extremely large piece of the comet enters the atmosphere, in which case it would very likely explode at some point in its flight, due to mechanical and thermal stresses.
Now, the good news is that the Earth's atmosphere shields us from objects that are initially below about 100 meters in size because they break-up and evaporate before reaching the ground. Still, the famous Tunguska Event in 1908 was a 50 meter stony meteor which evaporated about 20 kilometers above the Earth, and still flattened trees in a 30 kilometer area. Its yield was about 10 Megatons of TNT, and the frequency tables predict that such strikes should happen every 100 years or so. The next one could happen any day between now and 200 years from now!
The consequences of asteroidal impacts depend on the size of the asteroid. Here is a table of some possible consequences:
Size Yield Crater Effect
(Megatons) (km)
......................................................
75 m 100 1.5 Land impacts destroy area
the size of Washington or Paris)
160 m 500 3.0 Destroys large urban areas
350 m 5000 6.0 Destroys area the size of a
small state. Ocean impacts produce
tsunamis.
700 m 15,000 12 Land impact destroys Virginia,
Tiawan and ocean impact causes
major tsunami.
1.7 km 200,000 30 Land impacts affect climate,
global destruction of ozone,
tsunamis destroy coastal communities.
3.0 km 1 million 60 Large nations destroyed, widespread
fires from ejecta, climate change.
7.0 km 50 million 125 Mass extinction, global conflagration,
long term climate change.
16 km 200 million 250 Large mass extinction.
The truth is we really don't know what comets and asteroids actually are, or whether there's a real distinction between them, or if they are just keywords derived (mistakenly) from the two extremes of a continuous spectrum of bodies with every intermediate state fully represented.
If it has a large tail it could span half of the sky. Depends on if it is rocky or ice, and what types of components.
Originally posted by PuterMan
Comet Elenin is coming!
Source: SOTT
www.sott.net...
It is called Elenin since it was discovered by Leonid Elenin. I expect the internet to soon be ringing with rumors and news bytes about this comet. For now, there isn't much to say so I'm sharing what I've received in private from an astronomer at a big observatory that shall remain anonymous for the moment. He says:
1. It is too early to accurately predict the future path - it's orbital parameters haven't been revised.
2. Among the observable hyperbolic and parabolic comets (those that come from the Oort cloud) this one has the smallest perihelion distance and the smallest inclination to the ecliptic plane.
3. Comet Elenin's orbit may be unstable as it may encounter some dark bodies, for example, in the asteroid belt or even some Taurid objects. What would happen in those cases is a matter of luck.
4. This comet may carry a significant amount of material with it and if it follows the currently projected orbit, the Earth may very well pass through this material.
5. If Elenin is anything like what Victor Clube or James McCanney describes, we might be in for some surprises - good or bad, who knows?
When this was first discovered in December last year it was calculated that it would pass 8.8 Au (8.8 times the distance of the Sun form us) away. Now today the orbital calculation is down to 0.24 Au with a minimum as low as 0.15. This is being re-calculated all the time and could get even closer but it depends what it encounters in the Oort belt.
The Moon is 0.00256 Au form us to give you a comparison.
You should be aware the this comet could bring debris with it and we will pass through the debris trail – if it exists – around the 6th November 2011. Could this new long period comet (?) be the origin of the stories of Nibiru?
[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/0275420efcc6.gif[/atsimg]
You can look at all the technical details here: Jet Propulsion Labs small-body database browser. This also has the _javascript animation from which that image was taken.
It is definitely something to be watching out for and I shall try and keep this thread updated with information as the closest approach draws nearer.
edit on 17/1/2011 by PuterMan because: Could not make the link work
How about you showing me some supporting evidence for your assumptions? All you have provided so far is "theoretical" possibilities based on very little real knowledge of the subject. Perhaps you should consider reading up on the "old science" sources and actually seeing for yourself if they match with your own observations before you rubbish it on the basis that your electric universe theory will explain everything in the known universe instantly.
Most of our current knowledge about the origin of meteoroids comes from photographic fireball studies (meteors > magnitude -4) done over the last 50 years or so. This may sound like a long time, but good data has been collected on only about 800 fireballs so far. Of these, only 4 have been recovered on the ground as meteorites.
The similarities between asteroids and comets is made more apparent by the recent discovery of a coma (a distinctly cometary phenomena) around the asteroid Chiron, at its perihelion.
These parent bodies are composed of frozen methane (CH4), ammonia (NH3), water (H2O), and common gases (such as carbon dioxide, CO2), carbon dust and other trace materials.
These two possibilities are strongly contrasting views of the nature of comets. But if all goes well, on 2005 July 4, we will have answers. A NASA/JPL spacecraft named Deep Impact is now on its way to Comet Tempel 1. The spacecraft carries a probe that will be released one day before encounter and will then impact the comet nucleus while the main spacecraft speeds past and photographs what happens during a critical 13-minute period. What the camera will see depends on the nature and composition of the nucleus. The anticipated possibilities are: [[viii]]
* Probe flies through comet and comes out the other side
* Probe fractures comet into thousands of pieces that fly off
* Probe enters jello-like, compression-controlled rubble pile and makes a small, deep crater
* Probe impacts on weak, gravity-controlled surface and makes a huge, medium-depth crater
* Probe vaporizes on rocky, strength-controlled surface and makes a small, shallow crater
These are listed in order of increasing strength of nucleus.
Comets and Snow Balls? Meet Dr. Don Yeomans
How are a comet and a snow ball alike? Dr. Don Yeoman's explains that and the Deep Impact mission.
Though Deep Impact team members see this as a milestone event, advocates of the Electric Universe expect a 'shock to the system' with revolutionary implications. They say that a comet is not a primordial object left over from the formation of the solar system. Fundamentally, it is distinguishable from a rocky asteroid only by its more elliptical orbit.
In the Electric Universe a comet is a negatively charged object moving through the extensive and constant radial electric field of the positively charged Sun. A comet becomes negatively charged during its long sojourn in the outer solar system. As it speeds into the inner solar system, the increasing voltage and charge density of the plasma (solar 'wind') cause the nucleus to discharge electrically, producing the bright coma and tail.
The most obvious would be a flash (lightning-like discharge) shortly before impact.
So, before physical impact occurs, we may expect a sudden discharge between the comet nucleus and the copper projectile. It will have the characteristic light-curve of lightning, with rapid onset and exponential decay.
When the impactor arrives, Thornhill considers it likely that active jets will move or switch off, since the comet's electrical field will have been suddenly disturbed. The simple thermal out-gassing model does not expect this.
Comets have flared beyond the orbit of Jupiter, even beyond the orbit of Saturn, where known icy bodies do not sublimate under solar radiation. A potentially embarrassing, ad hoc proposal has been put forward that attributes the more remote and “miraculous” outbursts to collisions with meteoric material.
For the electrical theorists, the answer is all too obvious. Electrical discharge accelerates material into collimated jets along the self-confining Birkeland currents that constitute the discharge arcs.
Tempel 1 is a magnitude dimmer than (i.e., less than half as bright as) expected from the comet’s previous approaches to the Sun. Conventional theory has no explanation for this lower energy. The electrical model notes that the Sun is approaching the minimum in its sunspot cycle, which means that the solar electrical energy input is at a minimum. Because the comet’s brightness depends on electrical energy from the Sun’s circuit, the effect is analogous to turning down the dimmer switch on a light bulb. This lower energy level also reduces the likelihood of the more dramatic “electrical fireworks” during Deep Impact’s encounter.
Density: The dirty snowball model sometimes argues for comet nucleus densities as low as 0.1 g/cc, and sometimes as high as 1.0 g/cc – the density of water or less. The satellite model indicates that comets have typical asteroid densities of 1-3 g/cc – the density of light rock. Neither the spacecraft nor the probe is expected to be able to determine this comet’s density.
We also eagerly await the first pictures of the impact site, which have not been seen due to a huge surprise: The energy of the "impact" was much greater than NASA scientists had expected and-as predicted by Wallace Thornhill-was strongly reminiscent of the early Comet Shoemaker-Levy 9 impact events at Jupiter. Indeed, the luminous glow that persisted occluded the impact site to a degree that shocked observers and will make it difficult to determine the size of the resulting crater through the glare. Of course, a prime aim of the experiment was to observe the crater before the spacecraft had moved out of the required position. So here we see another example of the potential cost of asking the wrong questions.
1. The copper impactor generated such an energetic explosion that the primary mission sensors were swamped and the primary mission of photographing the crater was unable to be carried out. (Such a flash would be expected with a metal object approaching a highly charged object)
"We didn't expect the success of one part of the mission (bright dust cloud) to affect a second part (seeing the resultant crater). But that is part of the fun of science, to meet with the unexpected. "
Physicist Wal Thornhill commenting:
"It is now well documented that every scientist associated with the project was stunned by the scale of the energetic outburst. These scientists understood the kinetics of impact, and they all agreed that the explosion would be equivalent to 4.8 tons of TNT. That’s a good-sized bomb, but not even close to what occurred."
"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%. "
"There's a lot of structure on the comet, which is a bit surprising," Richardson said. "That could mean there's some strength to the comet."
I want you to keep in mind that the 850 lbs copper impactor that is striking the comet is basically an invisible spec in these images. It's so tiny against the huge comet that you can't even see it. As one scientist put it, "Its like a mosquito hitting a 747." The nucleus is estimated to be about 5 kilometers (3.1 miles) across and 7 (4.3 miles) kilometers tall. The detonation of the impactor is tremendous. Far greater than any model predicted (well not exactly... the electric model predicted it correctly). The impact event actually created a double flash. Two explosions took place; again, something correctly PREDICTED by the electric comet theorists. In fact all of the above observations were correctly PREDICTED by electric comet theorists. The double flash was created by an electrical discharge between the copper impactor and the comet, then the impact itself produced a flash.
Further, comets are pitch black! They are as dark as the toner in a copy machine:
"We have known for years that the surface of the earths Moon is dark -- about as reflective as an asphalt parking lot," said Robert Nelson, a project scientist on the Deep Space 1 mission at NASA's Jet Propulsion Laboratory. "The nucleus of Borrelly is about half as reflective as the Moon."
Scientists call this reflectivity -- the sunlight that is not absorbed by an object -- albedo.
"I'm not sure how you get an albedo that low," said Donald Yeomans, an expert on comets and asteroids at JPL.
I CAN TELL YOU! - ITS BECAUSE THEY ARE ELECTRICALLY BURNED PIECES OF ROCK!
When you electrically burn something it turns black with soot!
1. Astronomy
a. A diffuse mass of interstellar dust or gas or both, visible as luminous patches or areas of darkness depending on the way the mass absorbs or reflects incident radiation.
b. See galaxy.
These parent bodies are composed of frozen methane (CH4), ammonia (NH3), water (H2O), and common gases (such as carbon dioxide, CO2), carbon dust and other trace materials.
Originally posted by PuterMan
reply to post by ZeroGhost
If it has a large tail it could span half of the sky. Depends on if it is rocky or ice, and what types of components.
Astronomical dogma once again. Free your mind. Comets are not, nor have they ever been, made of ice, or cigarette ash or ice-cream or anything else other than rocks/minerals!
.
Cometary material on the other hand is usually no where near as dense, and in some cases of similar consistency as cigarette ash.
Originally posted by C.H.U.D.
Originally posted by PuterMan
reply to post by ZeroGhost
If it has a large tail it could span half of the sky. Depends on if it is rocky or ice, and what types of components.
Astronomical dogma once again. Free your mind. Comets are not, nor have they ever been, made of ice, or cigarette ash or ice-cream or anything else other than rocks/minerals!
This is the main reason I will no longer be replying to your posts...
Earlier on in this thread I made this post, where I said:
.
Cometary material on the other hand is usually no where near as dense, and in some cases of similar consistency as cigarette ash.
Note that I said of similar consistency. I did not say comets were made of cigarette ash.
It's blatantly obvious that:
1. You either have very poor comprehension skills
and/or
2. You don't care about facts, and you have to twist other people's words around in order to further your own agenda - trying to ram electric universe crap down everybody elses throats.
Either way, there is no point wasting my time talking to you any more.
PS. I made this post for the benefit of others, so everyone can see how pointless it is trying to have a discussion with someone like you. ATS is one of the few places I know where you can offer up your time and knowledge, only to be fobbed off in a manner which basically says "F**K you".