The Ancient Comet Goddess Venus

Originally posted by NowanKenubi
reply to post by blocula

 

What I find sad today is that people now take his ideas and they present it as a novel one, from them. Never a mention of him.

But then again, he was "only" a psychiatrist playing in others fields. It's a no-no for scientists, it seems.

He,his ideas and his book worlds in collision in 1950 were definitely ahead of their time...

Originally posted by minor007
how can a planet be a comet?

It can't. This is another silly Blocula thread.

Originally posted by AngryCymraeg

Originally posted by minor007
how can a planet be a comet?

It can't. This is another silly Blocula thread.

Why do you even bother wasting your time and band width posting trivial meaninglessness meant only to try and undermine my highly imaginative,open minded thinking?

Originally posted by blocula

Originally posted by AngryCymraeg

Originally posted by minor007
how can a planet be a comet?

It can't. This is another silly Blocula thread.

Why do you even bother wasting your time and band width posting trivial meaninglessness meant only to try and undermine my highly imaginative,open minded thinking?

Because a) you've ripped off an idea by Velikovsky and b) that idea is baseless. Venus is a planet that has been studied in a great deal of detail, including radar surveys that have shown that the planet has periodic massive volcanic eruptions that resurface it. Comets don't have those, they are composed of rocks and frozen gases that subliminate away in space when they approach the heat of the sun.

reply to post by AngryCymraeg
You dont know venus is a planet,neither do i and no one else does either.We think its a planet, because we are told to think its a planet.The surface and atmospheric conditions displayed by venus, could be exactly what a giant comet captured long ago would be like after orbiting the sun for thousands of years...

Originally posted by NowanKenubi
But then again, he was "only" a psychiatrist playing in others fields. It's a no-no for scientists, it seems.

Well.. yeah, you wouldn't go to an astronomer for psychotherapy, would you?

Venus is close to the same size as Earth. Venus as a cosmic interloper could have resonated with Earth then entered an orbit as the next planet nearer the Sun. Ancient fold stories exist that long ago Venus had a cometary type tail when viewed in the sky. "Worlds in Collision" by Immanuel Velikovsky was the book that first discussed all this.

Originally posted by blocula
reply to post by AngryCymraeg

 

You dont know venus is a planet,neither do i and no one else does either.We think its a planet, because we are told to think its a planet.The surface and atmospheric conditions displayed by venus, could be exactly what a giant comet captured long ago would be like after orbiting the sun for thousands of years...

edit on 12-4-2012 by blocula because: (no reason given)

Yes we do know. By the very definitions of the words "Planet" and "Comet"

Planet

A planet (from Greek πλανήτης αστήρ planētēs astēr "wandering star") is a celestial body orbiting a star or stellar remnant that is massive enough to be rounded by its own gravity, is not massive enough to cause thermonuclear fusion, and has cleared its neighbouring region of planetesimals.[a][1][2]

Comet

A comet is an icy small Solar System body that, when close enough to the Sun, displays a visible coma (a thin, fuzzy, temporary atmosphere) and sometimes also a tail. These phenomena are both due to the effects of solar radiation and the solar wind upon the nucleus of the comet. Comet nuclei range from a few hundred meters to tens of kilometers across and are composed of loose collections of ice, dust, and small rocky particles.

You can not call the planet Venus a "comet" because it does NOT fit the definition of what a comet is.

1) The size of Venus alone keeps it from being called a comet. It's size however does fit the definition of a planet.
2) The make up of Venus also does not fit with the make up of a comet
3) Venus orbit around the sun falls into step with all the other planets that orbit the sun, unlike comets which have a much more hyperbolic trajectories.

You can call it whatever you would like. However that does not change the fact that Venus really is a planet and not a comet.

This thread really does not belong in the Space Exploration forum, but rather in the Skunk Works since it is a highly speculative thread with no evidence or proof presented.

Originally posted by eriktheawful

Originally posted by blocula
reply to post by AngryCymraeg

 

You dont know venus is a planet,neither do i and no one else does either.We think its a planet, because we are told to think its a planet.The surface and atmospheric conditions displayed by venus, could be exactly what a giant comet captured long ago would be like after orbiting the sun for thousands of years...

edit on 12-4-2012 by blocula because: (no reason given)

You can not call the planet Venus a "comet" because it does NOT fit the definition of what a comet is.

1) The size of Venus alone keeps it from being called a comet. It's size however does fit the definition of a planet.
2) The make up of Venus also does not fit with the make up of a comet
3) Venus orbit around the sun falls into step with all the other planets that orbit the sun, unlike comets which have a much more hyperbolic trajectories.

You can call it whatever you would like. However that does not change the fact that Venus really is a planet and not a comet.

This thread really does not belong in the Space Exploration forum, but rather in the Skunk Works since it is a highly speculative thread with no evidence or proof presented.

Our definition of a comet is incomplete, because we dont know everything about comets,not even close and does anyone know what a giant comet would look like after being captured by a stars gravity and then orbiting that star for thousands of years? I and others think that would be venus and seriously,whats it really matter to you where my thread is? I dont care where anyones threads are placed...

reply to post by blocula


There are no giant comets. The largest a comet gets is a 50-mile diameter. Its a result of where they formed. If you want the geology signatures there are sources for that. Taking a small percentage of something not clearly defined to throw out everything known is a fallacy, and nobody gets anywhere doing that.

reply to post by Illustronic
Jupiter Turned Comet Into "Moon" for 12 Years >
news.nationalgeographic.com...

Originally posted by blocula
reply to post by Illustronic

 

Jupiter Turned Comet Into "Moon" for 12 Years >
news.nationalgeographic.com...

edit on 12-4-2012 by blocula because: (no reason given)

The 1,300-foot-wide (400-meter-wide) comet's stint as a so-called temporary satellite was revealed when the researchers used calculations taken since the comet's 1993 discovery to determine the space rock's past course.

Do you even read your own sources?

reply to post by Illustronic
According to the information in this and other links,Pluto,with a diameter of 1,423 miles,might have once been a Comet and theres even a suspected Comet thats larger than Jupiter > wiki.answers.com...

reply to post by blocula


Is 1,300 feet 50 miles? You posted that to prove what?

Originally posted by blocula
reply to post by Illustronic

 

According to the information in this and other links,Pluto,with a diameter of 1,423 miles,might have once been a Comet and theres even a suspected Comet thats larger than Jupiter > wiki.answers.com...

As was just asked: Do you even bother to read your own sources you link to?

I'll highlight the words from your very own source you linked to:

The asteroid Chiron is about the same size, and it has shown signs of developing a coma. If so, then Chiron is another comet. But it is also a straggler Kuiper Belt object (KBO), which makes one think of the other KBOs. They are icy worlds, and if one were placed in the inner solar system, the ices off the world would stream off to produce a comet. So does that mean that all KBOs are comets? Here we go with Pluto again. The International Astronomical Union has ruled that it is not a planet, but rather a KBO and a "dwarf planet". Could it really be a comet? If Pluto got into the inner Solar System, it would be one big whopper of a comet, perhaps. The same holds for Eris, too, and the other large KBOs. But this leads to the question: what is a comet anyway? To me a comet is any body that produces a bright center and a faint to bright tail trailing it, and lasting at least an hour (to exclude meteors).

The bodies that produce the traditional comets we observe are much like small asteroids or KBOs. They are solid bodies. The comets differ in that they have icy surfaces, unlike the rocky surfaces of Mars-Jupiter asteroids.

So to me anything that is capable of producing such a brilliant tail in the sky is a comet. That makes Eris and Pluto comets. So is Eris the largest comet? No. Recently Astronomy magazine reported an even larger comet. This one is larger than Jupiter. That's correct, larger than Jupiter. They reported that a large body, TrES-4, orbits the star GSC 02620-00648 in Hercules. This body is considerably bigger than Jupiter, maybe twice as big. But it is less massive. Bodies that are between 1 and 80 Jupiters in mass are all of about the same size, with the difference being their density. But this one is considerably larger. It must be a puffball of a planet, with gases on the surface that are heated up by the central star and blown away by the stellar wind, to produce an enormous tail. To me, TrES-4, although it is a gas-giant planet, is also a comet. A really huge comet! But is this the largest comet? No. There is one much larger than that one, and this object has been known since the 1600s. It is a favorite with amateur astronomers. It is Mira, the wonderful variable star in Cetus. This star varies in magnitude from 2.5 (about the same as Phecda in the Big Dipper) to 10 (a faint dot in an 8-inch telescope), over an irregular period that averages 331 days. It has long been known to be a red giant star about 1.2 times as massive as the Sun, and as large as Mars' orbit. The maxima and minima have been studiously observed since the 1600s. Astronomers have discovered something new with Mira. It is producing a tail in ultraviolet light that makes it look like a comet. If it looks like a comet, then it is one. To me this star qualifies as a comet, as it consists of a bright object with a long tail behind it. The tail is certainly long. Instead of 100 million miles (typical of a Solar System comet), it is 13 light years long! The star is moving fast, and it is ejecting gas, which is forming this tail. So this is a comet, in a planetary system where the central star is itself a comet. Read more: wiki.answers.com...

As you can see, your source is a single person who has their own definition of what a comet is. A definition that is incorrect with the standards set forth by the International Astronomical Union. The definition of the comet is as follows:

A comet is an icy small Solar System body that, when close enough to the Sun, displays a visible coma (a thin, fuzzy, temporary atmosphere) and sometimes also a tail. These phenomena are both due to the effects of solar radiation and the solar wind upon the nucleus of the comet. Comet nuclei range from a few hundred meters to tens of kilometers across and are composed of loose collections of ice, dust, and small rocky particles.

Comet

In order for a object to be considered a comet, it must meet ALL of the above criteria.

Your source is ONE person's opinion. And their opinion is ludicrous. They are saying that a star is a comet, because there is something streaming from it......

A star can not be a comet. You can't simply change the definitions of identifying terms. They are defined with those criteria for a REASON. To stop confusion.

reply to post by blocula


This link is Wiki answers. Anybody uncontested can post anything they want, unsupported. Like this;

Comet Hale-Bopp, which was 60 miles in diameter

Not even close. Hale-Bopp isn't even a 40-mile diameter at it's largest axis, we know this from signatures. That entire post is conjectural crap, and it is the only 'answer' to the particular question posted in a public uneducated forum, where people blur facts through ignorance of the studies. Wiki Answers is a public Q&A chat site. Sometimes someone shows up with sources that can be verified, when no sources are indicated one cannot write a school paper siting that as fact.

Originally posted by blocula
reply to post by AngryCymraeg

 

You dont know venus is a planet,neither do i and no one else does either.We think its a planet, because we are told to think its a planet.The surface and atmospheric conditions displayed by venus, could be exactly what a giant comet captured long ago would be like after orbiting the sun for thousands of years...

edit on 12-4-2012 by blocula because: (no reason given)

It's been surveyed from orbit. It's been mapped. We have photos from the surface. We know how large it is, what's gravity is and a great deal more besides. It's a planet. Deal with it.

Originally posted by blocula
...theres even a suspected Comet thats larger than Jupiter...

When they speak about a comets size, they're generally referring to it's coma. Which is nothing more than a thin, gaseous atmosphere. The nucleus, which is the actual solid part of the comet is generally quite small.

Take comet 17P/Holmes for example. At one point the coma's diameter was greater than that of the Sun, but it's nucleus is estimated to be only 3.5km in diameter.

Venus is an Earth sized planet. There is no evidence to support it ever having been a comet, as no comets with a nucleus remotely close to the size of our planet, have ever been observed.

reply to post by john_bmth

Well.. yeah, you wouldn't go to an astronomer for psychotherapy, would you?

A severe space-case might require the combined expertise of both disciplines.

All the planets except Venus have the same direction of rotation. Only Venus' is different. The rotation is also unusually slow. Venus' surface anomalies remain unexplained, It has craters that appear the same size, indicating they all formed aboput the same time. The scientists explain that by a hypothesis that Venus periodically turns itself inside out and completely renews its surface. No such process is known to occur. -One could go on and on about Venus' anomalies that are unexplained, and it would be more convincing than "a comet cannot be that big."