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.
Originally posted by Arbitrageur
That's a good question and I think it identifies one of the problems with the electric comet theory.
Originally posted by vind21
If comets produce OH due to solar win then would not all rocky bodies in the solar system lacking atmospheres display this same effect?
I am not going to try to defend electric comet theory, however I suspect they answer they might suggest is that the rocky composition of comets differs enough from other rocky bodies such that comets produce a coma whereas other rocky bodies don't. Evidence would be needed to support such a claim and as far as I know, it's lacking.edit on 20-6-2013 by Arbitrageur because: clarification
Yes the video mentioned the negative electric charge as I described earlier. However this doesn't make much sense if the composition is the same, and the video discussed comet composition but I don't recall it saying "Structurally they do not vary significantly from any of the rocky bodies in the solar system" though you may have found that elsewhere.
Originally posted by vind21
They could not make this claim, one of the major assertions of the EU is that comments are "generally" a direct product of terrestrial bodies in the solar system. Structurally they do not vary significantly from any of the rocky bodies in the solar system to the point where we find nearly identical isotopic structures between earth rocks and some comet dust. The onl appreciable difference is the transfer from a negatively charged zone outside the solar wind to a positively charged zone inside the heliosphere.
Originally posted by dragonridr
reply to post by vind21
When are people going to let go of this electric universe garbage? It shows a true lack of understanding of physics and flys in the face of observations. An electric universe can't explain black holes or spiral galaxies or plasma arcs or neutrinos which have no charge. Or for that matter solar wind in order for this whole theory to work the sun would have to have a positive charge meaning all those electrons would stick to it like glue.
This makes me wonder, the fact that the electrical activity forms the tail, if the pieces of comets interact with earths atmosphere the same way.
This thread is reminding me of all the predictions the EU crowd made about Elenin. This thread is also reminding me of how none of those predictions came true and instead Elenin broke apart.
As I said earlier it's a myth that the standard model doesn't consider electrical aspects of the solar system..of course it does and you just mentioned one aspect that has been studied.
Originally posted by JohnPhoenix
reply to post by Arbitrageur
I wanna ask you. What happens in your opinion when one planet collides with another planet? We know the atmosphere has a charge the the ground has a charge and these can react together to produce electricity which can be measured by a meter. If this can happen.. whats to say one body with a negative charge when it collides with another body with a positive charge wont have a strong electrical reaction either? Wouldn't this in itself already give credence to some aspects of EU theory being sound?
The video mentioned Elenin and claimed it somehow supports the electric comet theory but it seems like it does more to disprove the idea than to prove it. It seems like no matter what happens, EU proponents try to claim that what happened was consistent with their theory, even in the case of Elenin.
Originally posted by Xcalibur254
This thread is reminding me of all the predictions the EU crowd made about Elenin. This thread is also reminding me of how none of those predictions came true and instead Elenin broke apart.
reply to post by Arbitrageur
The video mentioned Elenin and claimed it somehow supports the electric comet theory but it seems like it does more to disprove the idea than to prove it.
The biggest discrepancy is the electric comet video claims the comet has a negative electrical charge, and that has something to do with it, where as the Japan space agency description says this charge exchange might occur even with neutral materials in the comet. So the one claim in the video that is partly right about the origin of the X-rays from comets being electrical in nature, doesn't require that the comet be negatively charged as the video suggests if the description on that website of the process is correct, though more research is probably needed to confirm the exact process.
But if the Earth or a comet had a net negative charge for example, there would be a tendency to attract positively charged particles from the solar wind, and repel negatively charged particles, so the solar wind would eventually reduce the net charge for this reason.
This also shows that mainstream science doesn't deny electrical effects exist in our solar system, contrary to the popular mythological view by electric universe proponents that mainstream thinks nothing is electrical.
However this doesn't make much sense if the composition is the same, and the video discussed comet composition but I don't recall it saying "Structurally they do not vary significantly from any of the rocky bodies in the solar system" though you may have found that elsewhere.
You apparently didn't read the paper I cited. It's based on measurements not assumptions
Originally posted by FreeThinkerIdealist
reply to post by dragonridr
I believe he stated that EU doesn't deny gravity, but is a supplemental part of the whole system.
There is nothing wrong with not agreeing with the theory, being skeptical, or having a strong opinion that it does not fit into your theories of everything. There is something wrong with being blatantly dismissive and snarky about how you challenge others who are being genuine and polite.
All of our science is based on limited knowledge. What we know today, might be found to be completely wrong tomorrow. The ones who were so sure the world was flat, thought they had sound reasoning to stand on. Those who thought the earth we stand on was the center of all things, certainly had proof when they looked upward; perspective and trusting their eyes was plenty of proof.
So, how can one be so cocky that any theory we have today, is as solid as one might believe, or they may claim?
How can you be so sure the light barrier cannot be broken? How can we be sure gravity is what they claim? How can we verify the age of anything, without absolute proof?
Science today has grand claims. Dating things to millions and billions of years ... but those dating methods rely on assumptions. They claim to have an idea to how the universe started, but there is no proof, and surely there never could be ... it is all fanciful delusions of brilliant minds. It cannot be observed.
So, with some attitude adjustment, and proper discussion with respectful debate tactics; we might actually be able to have a conversation. It doesn't mean either side wins, but healthy interaction with intelligent stimulation is exactly what forums like these are meant to be ... not a place to flash you troll face and smugly play mind games. Those things are for the simple minded and people who don't seek truth, but to only stir the pot.
With an open mind, and the ability to discuss things like adults, maybe, just maybe, our species might have a shot at improving itself in greater leaps of knowledge. The power of respect, even while in disagreement is wielded by the wisest.edit on 6/21/13 by FreeThinkerIdealist because: (no reason given)
Originally posted by Xcalibur254
reply to post by vind21
This thread and this blog give a good overview of what the EU supporters were claiming about Elenin. There was as almost as much doomsaying coming from them as there was from the Nibiru crowd.