Posted on 06/29/2004 9:21:41 PM PDT by Swordmaker
NASA's Stardust spacecraft snapped these photos of Comet Wild 2 on January 2, 2004. On the left is the comet nucleus and on the right a composite of the nucleus and a longer exposure highlighting the comet's jets. According to a recent press release, project scientists expected "a dirty, black, fluffy snowball" with a couple of jets that would be "dispersed into a halo". Instead they found more than two dozen jets that "remained intact"-they did not disperse in the fashion of a gas in a vacuum. Some of the jets emanated from the dark unheated side of the comet-an anomaly no one had expected. Chunks of the comet, some as big as bullets, blasted the spacecraft as it crossed three jets. Wild 2's surface was covered with "spires, pits and craters" that could only be supported by rock, not by sublimating ice or snow. The discovery was more than surprising, "it was mind-boggling".
When a theory's predictions are constantly discredited by new discoveries, it is "falsified". The unexpected blast of particles hitting Stardust is one small ding for the spacecraft's shield, but the Wild 2 anomalies are one giant fender-bender for the dirty snowball theory.
For many years now, the theory itself has obstructed the view of evidence, including close-up photographs of comets and asteroids. The NASA press release claims the comet "is unlike any other type of solar system body". Unlike Comet Borrelly, which sported unexpected " mountains, faults and grooves"? Unlike comet Halley, with its hot jets and diverse landscape? Unlike the steep-edged and flat-bottomed craters on asteroids Eros and Mathilda and Ida? Unlike the scarred surface of the Martian moon Phobos, virtually all the Jovian moons (especially the little ones), and now Saturn's little moon Phoebe? Every small solid body we've approached has surprised scientists with such sharply-defined surface relief.
The cascade of discovery has not surprised scientists investigating electrified plasma in space. But astronomers and astrophysicists are unaware of this century-old field of study. The structural details of the craters, grooves, cliffs, and other landforms, as well as the collimated jets, match those produced in plasma labs.
In the electrical hypothesis, a rock moving rapidly through the electric field of the Sun will develop a plasma sheath that stretches into a coma thousands of kilometers across and a filamentary tail that remains coherent over millions of miles. Arcing to the surface will generate high temperatures in small areas. The electrical activity will produce X-rays and ultraviolet light. The predictions of the model are testable, and the implications reach far beyond modern comet theory.
None are so blind as they who will not see.
so, yet another bit of evidence in support of the Plasm Theory of Univeral Organization?
thanks for posting this.
Yes, to answer your rhetorical question?
oh, I count myself among the laymen supporters of the heresy known as the Plasma Theory, so I take (an almost sadistic) delight whenever more supportive evidence is demonstrated. Not that I expect the Big Bang Orthodox Church to actually pay attention, but I expect their squeals of outrage shall be entertaining.
Glad to have you, brother plasmoid...
Likewise, my brother in astrophysical heresy.
any good links with info about this, that a layman can understand?
nope, none on-tap.
I caqnnot say I am really up on the topic, but I have been keeping tabs on it casually for over ten years now.
I would suggest Google, advanced search option
Plasma Theory, Astrophysics,
waitaminnit, I'm being lazy
here:
http://www.google.com/search?as_q=Plasma+Theory%2C+Astrophysics%2C+Big+Bang%2C+rival%2C+universe%2C+origins&num=10&hl=en&ie=ISO-8859-1&btnG=Google+Search&as_epq=&as_oq=&as_eq=&lr=&as_ft=i&as_filetype=&as_qdr=all&as_nlo=&as_nhi=&as_occt=any&as_dt=i&as_sitesearch=&safe=images
a good startpoint:
http://nowscape.com/big-ban2.htm
IIRC, the Godfather of the Plasma Heresy is a fellow named Hoyle.
(please correct me if I remember incorrectly)
Google "Plasma Cosmology"
lots of articles.
the Headmaster Heretic is Hannes Alfven
Strange Black Musket sends:
http://www.electric-cosmos.org/index.htm
http://www.holoscience.com/index.php
http://public.lanl.gov/alp/plasma/universe.html
Ping
Gee, a comet isn't a snowball after all...who woulda thunk it?!1. The Big Bang is wrong: creation of the entire mass and energy of the universe out of nothing in the first instant of time is a violation of the law of conservation of mass/energy.
2. Evolution is wrong: the orderly sequencing of more than 64 base instructions in DNA code is mathematically impossible in less than 17 billion years without intelligent intervention.
3. General Relativity is wrong: if Gravity was limited to merely the speed of light our planetary orbits would be stacked and shaped like a wedding cake in ever expanding layers as one went out to ever more distant planets from the Sun due to the movement through space of our solar system in the Milky Way's rotational travels through the universe.
...
Whew! Is that enough scientific sacred cows slaughtered for one day?!
nah - i prefer this one above all others:
If the BBT was even slightly correct, the universe ought to be a very large patch of hard and total vacuum located dead-center in a uniformly expanding sphere the surface of which is a uniform-density skim of dust, with no accretions of matter larger than a proton.
that manifestly ain't the case.
 |
||
| · join · view topics · view or post blog · bookmark · post new topic · subscribe · | ||
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.