Comet Elenin

  • Thread starter Dotini
  • 236 comments
  • 31,380 views
driftking18594
^ Where did you get this information from?
Click to expand...
From the science writers Ian Stewart and Jack Cohen.
Jack Cohen is an internationally known reproductive biologist. Ian Stewart is Professor of Mathematics at the University of Warwick. They have written a collection of science books covering pretty wide scope.
 
wfooshee
"Trained catastrophist?" There is such a thing?!?!
Click to expand...

wfooshee, I too doubt there is any such formal designation. However, I'm pretty sure all modern geologists are well aware of the "catastrophic" events in geology, and old uniformitarian tenets and college curricula modified accordingly. Velikovsky is still in print, and has apparently been in part vindicated. He has a substantial fan base among geologists - my father and some of his cohort in the '50's Texas oil patch being early examples. But anyhow, there is a diverse body of literature pertaining to catastrophism, much of it thought provoking. I've only sampled the surface, so couldn't discuss it in any depth. Some of it is very controversial, so I should probably stay away from it. I need to get used to the idea of discussing only what has previously been agreed upon by higher authority as acceptable and non-controversial, and leave the controversies to a (much) younger generation. Soon I'll be migrating to the knitting and macrame thread.
 
Nothing wrong with controversy, as long as it's not simply sensationalism, and has some observable science behind it.

What, no crochet? :D
 
Dotini
Hi, Azuremen. Did your grandfather work in Texas during the 40's -70's? If so, it's likely he and my father crossed paths a time or two.

The 'insane' tilt of Uranus and retrograde motion of some of the other major bodies and moons is held to be prima facie evidence of some kind of catastrophic event. Collision, capture, explosion of a former major body in the asteroid belt, or whatever it was is the subject of much debate. Discoveries about cometary impacts (dinosaur extinction) on Earth and more recently the vivid Shoemaker-Levy 9 impact with Jupiter, have wooed many former uniformitarians away from slow-motion-only ideas of planetary evolution.

Respectfully submitted, open to correction,
Dotini
Click to expand...

VP of Exploration, Drilling and Production at United Gas Corporation in the 60's and likely part of the 50's.

As for the events around Uranus, capture is unlikely as its orbit matches up nicely with the others in the plane, unlike Pluto which does look to a capture or throw off. I believe the most wildly accepted theory is a proto-planet smashed into Uranus in the earlier phases of the solar system, resulting in the tilt.

Venus is the only major body I can think of that has a retrograde orbit, unless you want to count Uranus since its North pole as defined by the right hand rule is below the plane of its orbit. There are numerous moons with retrograde orbits, but that is likely because they captured objects.
 
http://ssd.jpl.nasa.gov/sbdb.cgi

Here's a link to the NASA JPL Small-Body Database Browser.

For info on Comet Elenin, type "Elenin" into the lower search box and enter.
Once there, click on "Orbit Diagram". Here, you may view the orbits of Elenin and Earth through time either from overhead or the plane of the ecliptic.

It will be seen that the comet is close to the plane of the ecliptic. Since the tails of comets are blown away from the Sun, and Elenin will be between the Sun and Earth, there seems a good chance we will be visited by Elenin's tail.

In 1910/1911, Earth was visited by the tail of the short-period Comet Halley, and no ill effects seemed to ensue.

Often two tails will be seen, the plasma tail and the dust tail, pointing in slightly different directions. http://www.solarviews.com/eng/comet.htm

Respectfully submitted,
Dotini
 
This is cool, I remember being so facinated with hale-bopp comet in 97' and it looks like the closest it came was 1.35AU, so this .15AU sounds considerable closer. I can't wait, and should consider finally picking up a telescope.
 
I couldn't believe my eyes when I saw the comet's period in the NASA browser. So I looked elsewhere: http://cs.astronomy.com/asycs/theme...readID=50322&PostID=463625&PermaPostID=463625

Sure enough, the period is estimated at an astonishing 3.45 million years. It'll take me a while to sort through what this might mean. For one thing, this may be its first visit to us. Although it's funny how close it is to our plane of ecliptic - within 1.8 degrees. So it may belong to our solar system after all?


IAU seems to be anticipating a magnitude of 3.8.

Respectfully,
Dotini
 
Last edited:
Dotini
In 1910/1911, Earth was visited by the tail of the short-period Comet Halley, and no ill effects seemed to ensue.
Click to expand...
So, what would the difference be between passing through the tail vs the dust trail?
 
The visible tail is stuff blown off by solar wind, always facing away from the sun. As it leaves the comet actually travels towards its tail.

Dust trail would be heavier debris dropped by the comet during its passage, maintaining the comet's momentum more or less, drifting away from it over time. Dust trail will pretty much be along its actual path.

As for the effects difference, the periodic metor showers we have are "dust" trails. Maybe this will light up a shooting star once in a while. As for the effect of the tail, I would expect the same we've seen from every other comet through recorded history: not a dang thing.
 
FoolKiller
So, what would the difference be between passing through the tail vs the dust trail?
Click to expand...

I'm assuming you're asking about the difference between the plasma tail and the dust/debris tail? I may have inadvertently used the word "trail" instead of tail, but I meant tail in all instances.

As far as I know, they both point away from the Sun, but at possibly slightly different angles, but maybe heavier debris does lag behind?

X-Rays have been found emitting from Comet Hyakutake.

But as far as the possible consequences of passing through comet dust trails or plasma tails - I don't know. I will admit that the comet's long period of ~3.45 million years has me intrigued. Comets that orbit entirely within the solar system or which have short periods traveling through interstellar space will have the same or nearly the same electrical charge as the of solar system (that part enclosed by the heliosheath) - I think. Comet Elenin may, stress may, have picked up a strong negative charge relative to the bodies in the solar system. What the consequences of this are, I cannot say.

Respectfully and cautiously submitted, always open to correction,
Dotini
 
Last edited:
wfooshee
As for the effects difference, the periodic metor showers we have are "dust" trails. Maybe this will light up a shooting star once in a while. As for the effect of the tail, I would expect the same we've seen from every other comet through recorded history: not a dang thing.
Click to expand...
I know what the difference between the tail and dust trail is. That is why I asked what the effect difference would be. I thought that they were both pretty much forms of debris, with the tail having some ionized particles.

But he seems to be caught up on the idea of Earth coming into contact with the tail, so I am trying to figure out why. I figured that at worst we get a few hours of a very active meteor shower.

Dotini
I'm assuming you're asking about the difference between the plasma tail and the dust/debris trail tail?
Click to expand...
Well, I don't see a lot of stuff describing a plasma tail (I think you are obsessed with plasma) so much as ionized particles of gas and dust. But yes, how will passing through the tail (type I and/or type II) differ from say, the Perseids?
 
Last edited:
FoolKiller
Well, I don't see a lot of stuff describing a plasma tail (I think you are obsessed with plasma) so much as ionized particles of gas and dust. But yes, how will passing through the tail (type I and/or type II) differ from say, the Perseids?
Click to expand...

You're right about me being obsessed with plasma - it's 99.99% of the visible universe! Plasma is indeed particles of ionized dust (solids) and gas. But it can also be liquid water. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V7jKL2-B0QA
A few minutes googling will acquaint you with it (plasma, the 4th state of matter).

In its arc mode, plasma is lightning. Unpleasant to come in contact with.

So IF, stress IF, Earth is brushed by a strongly ionized (charged) comet tail, there could be electrical discharges (like lightning - plasma in arc mode) or the aurora borealis (plasma in glow mode, like a neon light). Plasma also exists in dark mode - which is below the threshold of glowing.

The Perseids are very small, short period objects - left-over debris from the comet Swift-Tuttle, I think. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Perseids
 
Last edited:
Dotini
I may have inadvertently used the word "trail" instead of tail, but I meant tail in all instances.
Click to expand...
The tail and the trail are distinctively different. We pass through trails all the time, some like clockwork. It allows us to be prepared to watch meteor showers as we know when they will hit in advance.

But as far as the possible consequences of passing through comet dust trails or plasma tails - I don't know. I will admit that the comet's long period of ~3.45 million years has me intrigued.
Click to expand...
You made a point about it. I thought you may have had a reason.

Comets that orbit entirely within the solar system or which have short periods traveling through interstellar space will have the same or nearly the same electrical charge as the of solar system (that part enclosed by the heliosheath) - I think. Comet Elenin may, stress may, have picked up a strong negative charge relative to the bodies in the solar system. What the consequences of this are, I cannot say.
Click to expand...
1) Why would they have picked that up? 2) As we know the solar wind is ionizing some of the particles on comets would it be safe to assume that if this were the case that it would either weakening that charge or be reacting in a way that would be detectable? 3) Would the finer particulates of a tail be enough to matter? I could see a reaction in the event of a nucleus impact. Maybe an EMP like event or something.

Dotini
You're right about me being obsessed with plasma - it's 99.99% of the visible universe! Plasma is indeed particles of ionized dust (solids) and gas. But it can also be liquid water.
Click to expand...
Awesome. Any reason why you seem to choose to use it interchangeably to describe all 99.99% of the universe it makes up? I have seen you use it to describe everything from intelligent species, the sun, comet tails, and now even water. Honestly, it is hard to tell what you are describing. It'd be like me talking about my pet cat and dog along with my wife but only referring to them all as "the mammal."

In its arc mode, plasma is lightning. Unpleasant to come in contact with.
Click to expand...
For instance, do you refer to lightning as thunder and plasma?

So IF, stress IF, Earth is brushed by a strongly ionized (charged) comet tail, there could be electrical discharges (like lightning - plasma in arc mode) or the aurora borealis (plasma in glow mode, like a neon light).
Click to expand...
And is there any empirical evidence that shows the possibility of this negative charge, and that the tail of a comet would hold on to enough of it without dissipation that it could do any of this? I'm still stuck on the IF from it even having the negative charge.

I just feel like I am caught in an HG Welles story for some reason.
 
FoolKiller
The tail and the trail are distinctively different. We pass through trails all the time, some like clockwork. It allows us to be prepared to watch meteor showers as we know when they will hit in advance.


You made a point about it. I thought you may have had a reason.


1) Why would they have picked that up? 2) As we know the solar wind is ionizing some of the particles on comets would it be safe to assume that if this were the case that it would either weakening that charge or be reacting in a way that would be detectable? 3) Would the finer particulates of a tail be enough to matter? I could see a reaction in the event of a nucleus impact. Maybe an EMP like event or something.


Awesome. Any reason why you seem to choose to use it interchangeably to describe all 99.99% of the universe it makes up? I have seen you use it to describe everything from intelligent species, the sun, comet tails, and now even water. Honestly, it is hard to tell what you are describing. It'd be like me talking about my pet cat and dog along with my wife but only referring to them all as "the mammal."


For instance, do you refer to lightning as thunder and plasma?


And is there any empirical evidence that shows the possibility of this negative charge, and that the tail of a comet would hold on to enough of it without dissipation that it could do any of this? I'm still stuck on the IF from it even having the negative charge.

I just feel like I am caught in an HG Welles story for some reason.
Click to expand...


I feel like I'm under assault! I don't know how to separate your post into discrete elements for answering.

Honestly - please, please believe me - I'm trying as hard as I know how to sincerely answer - without over-dramatizing - all your questions. But I'm not a genius like Famine or Einstein or Newton. I'm just an old schmuck go-kart racer that got fascinated with space and plasma, and now I'm retired with the time to study some of it.

I'm prepared to explain all that you've asked. But could you please lower the shotgun and ask one question at a time, sir - please?

Shortly I'm constrained to leave the house for the rest of the day, so please pardon me if you do not hear from me until tomorrow. You may feel like you're stuck in an HG Welles story, but I feel like I'm caught in one by Philip K. Dick!

Your humble servant,
Dotini
 
Dotini
I feel like I'm under assault! I don't know how to separate your post into discrete elements for answering.
Click to expand...

Do you mean you don't know how to handle them all at once or space them out? To space them out put quote tags [*quote*] [*/quote*](minus the *s of course) around whatever part you want to address separately. There is even a button that will do it to any highlighted text for you that looks like a cartoon speech bubble. It is just to the right of the Insert Image button.
quote.gif


Honestly - please, please believe me - I'm trying as hard as I know how to sincerely answer - without over-dramatizing - all your questions. But I'm not a genius like Famine or Einstein or Newton. I'm just an old schmuck go-kart racer that got fascinated with space and plasma, and now I'm retired with the time to study some of it.
Click to expand...
I didn't think it would require a genius to answer why you think it would have a negative charge. Or why you use a term the way you do.

And I thought that sense you were caught up in the whole passing through the tail thing you might have been able to answer the slightly more technical questions I asked.

I'm prepared to explain all that you've asked. But could you please lower the shotgun and ask one question at a time, sir - please?
Click to expand...
Since I don't have all week, can I just number them and put them in a list? And I am not on the attack. I am looking for clarification. You didn't point me to where you get your information so you are my only resource to clarify this.


Shortly I'm constrained to leave the house for the rest of the day, so please pardon me if you do not hear from me until tomorrow.
Click to expand...
Hey we all got real lives, right?

Organized questions:

1) What would cause long-period comets to pick up a strong negative charge?

2) Is there empirical evidence of this happening or all theoretical assumptions?

4) Assuming they do get a negative charge, and we know the sun ionizes comet debris, would that weaken the negative charge or react in a way we can detect?

5) Would the comet's tail have enough charged particles to really have any kind of reaction that the common man can detect?

6) Why do you use the term plasma interchangeably in so many ways to describe things that have different names in common usage, like say lightning or ionized gas? To be blunt, it gets confusing.

That is all.
 
This topic reminded me of a very rare incident that happened to someone I know. He found one day a hole in his car and below it a small toasted rock. The only logical explanation is that it was space debris. Hopefully the damage was only cosmetic but I still find it amazing to this day that nobody was hurt!
 
In addition to that I remember the story of a school boy walking along and his hand was hit by a meteorite, the hand was not badly hurt, what a great treasure to find.
 
PeterJB
I doubt you'll need one at a distance of 14 million miles...
Click to expand...

I just wanted one for general use (before and after comet), out here in north dakota there is almost zero light polution, where as growing up near seattle between the light polution and overcast every other day I missed most of anything to do with the night sky. haley-bopp was the best i've seen (never had a telescope)
 
blaaah
In addition to that I remember the story of a school boy walking along and his hand was hit by a meteorite, the hand was not badly hurt, what a great treasure to find.
Click to expand...

And what luck too to be hit by a meteorite.

If I was that kid, I'd go buy a lottery ticket right away and try my luck again.
 
The amazing story:
14 year old hit by 30,000mph space rock:

Gerrit Blank, 14, was on his way to school when he saw "ball of light" heading straight towards him from the sky.

A red hot, pea-sized piece of rock then hit his hand before bouncing off and causing a foot wide crater in the ground.

The teenager survived the strike, the chances of which are just 1 in a million - but with a nasty three-inch long scar on his hand.

He said: "At first I just saw a large ball of light, and then I suddenly felt a pain in my hand.

"Then a split second after that there was an enormous bang like a crash of thunder."


"The noise that came after the flash of light was so loud that my ears were ringing for hours afterwards.

"When it hit me it knocked me flying and then was still going fast enough to bury itself into the road," he explained.

Scientists are now studying the pea-sized meteorite which crashed to Earth in Essen, Germany.

"I am really keen on science and my teachers discovered that the fragment is really magnetic," said Gerrit.

Chemical tests on the rock have proved it had fallen from space.

Ansgar Kortem, director of Germany's Walter Hohmann Observatory, said: "It's a real meteorite, therefore it is very valuable to collectors and scientists.

"Most don't actually make it to ground level because they evaporate in the atmosphere. Of those that do get through, about six out of every seven of them land in water," he added.

Source: Daily Telegraph.
 
That kid is full of it and the person that wrote the article a fool.

Small meteorites like that are slowed to terminal velocity by the atmosphere.

No ball of light (how would you see something travelling at 30,000 mph anyway?).

No foot wide crater.

No enormous bang.

And something pea sized capable of creating a foot wide crater in asphalt wouldn't "bounce off" anything short of a 3 inch steel plate. It wouldn't glance off. It wouldn't "anything" off, his hand wouldn't impede it one iota.

I think the kid burned his hand on his crack pipe and needed an explanation for his mom.
 
Last edited:
^Agrred mostly.

Sorry i have just started reading this thread agian. and i just have one things to say; Velikovsky....really?

His name should not be placed anywere near science.
 
I think the headline about 30,000mph, was to suggest that is what it's speed was when it entered earths atmosphere, obviously slower when it hit the ground/boy.
It is very easy to see bright balls of light, I saw a metor once shoot over relatively low in the sky, so low I could hear it crackling/fizzling from the combustion going on.
About the crater and graze to his hand I dont know about that. Maybe it was a fragment that hit his hand, an almost dust sized particle, and the meteorite missed him and made the crater.
 
gary31
^Agrred mostly.

Sorry i have just started reading this thread agian. and i just have one things to say; Velikovsky....really?

His name should not be placed anywere near science.
Click to expand...

Hi gary31,

A few posts up Foolkiller has asked me some questions I'd like to have a crack at answering. But first I feel I need to ask your indulgence, because earlier I mentioned the controversial name Velikovsky. You stated his name should not belong anywhere near science, and presumably you feel the same way about me - that I should not be given a respectful hearing on any scientific subject. I'm asking you for permission to speak because I already know some of what I may say is not 100% to everyone's satisfaction, and could be met with strong resistance and skepticism, like Velikovsky. Since I'm barely higher than an ant in terms of science degrees and intelligence, I need the help of other forum members in order not to get stepped on and squashed like a bug.

Below I've included a few links on Velikovsky for readers who may not be familiar with him. Personally, I know many of his views are unsound, and I do not ascribe to them. However, there is also something positive to say.

http://www.nytimes.com/1987/05/16/opinion/l-or-vindicated-prophet-185387.html
Or Vindicated Prophet?
Published: May 16, 1987

The theories of Immanuel Velikovsky were met with widespread derision during his lifetime, in some cases prompting attempts at censorship from the scientific community.

Thus it was refreshing to read Robert Gallo's letter connecting Velikovsky's predictions to the hypothesis submitted by Prof. Thomas Gold of Cornell University (news article, March 22) about the extraterrestrial source of hydrocarbons. I regret only that Mr. Gallo did not go farther.

Velikovsky made a number of predictions since demonstrated as accurate. His comments on the content of the atmosphere of the planet Venus were ridiculed, but have since been proved correct; his statement regarding the surface temperature of Venus has likewise stood the test of time (the prevailing theory of the time did not), and his argument for a magnetosphere surrounding Earth was justified in his lifetime.

The last eight months have seen your pages alive with ''new'' proposals attempting to explain the sudden disappearance of the dinosaurs or to account for layers of iridium found in Earth's strata; most notably the ''death star'' hypothesis. Such cataclysmic intervention was a basic component of Velikovsky's view of the cosmos.

It is not a question of whether Velikovsky was right or wrong in his overall picture of stellar events. He has been sufficiently proved to merit the credit (or the blame) for the theory he proposed nearly 40 years ago. ROBERT HEARN New York, April 27, 1987

http://books.google.com/books?id=mw...wCQ#v=onepage&q=velikovsky vindicated&f=false

http://www.velikovsky.info/Cosmos_Without_Gravitation

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Immanuel_Velikovsky

Respectfully requested,
Dotini
 
reverand33
I just wanted one for general use (before and after comet), out here in north dakota there is almost zero light polution, where as growing up near seattle between the light polution and overcast every other day I missed most of anything to do with the night sky. haley-bopp was the best i've seen (never had a telescope)
Click to expand...

Yes, I was under the assumption that the apparent magnitude would be far less that the estimated +6. Considering that it is the same size and Hale-Bopp and will pass considerably closer, but most of what you see is the coma anyway.
 
In partial response to Foolkiller's questions, I found this:
Hartley 2 is not a ‘snowball’ nor are any other comets. Comets are no different from a rocky asteroid, in fact all comets are simply asteroids with a cometary orbital path. (that’s why they all look like asteroids in all the comet photos !)
The reason for the ‘bright jets’ is due to an electric field charge potential difference between far away in the solar system, and close to the Sun. As the comet gets closer to the Sun the more positive electric field charge near the Sun causes the comet to electrically discharge its negative charge that the comet has stored up due to its capacitance ability to hold electrons. The far edges of the solar system and beyond are negatively charged compared to the positive charge near the Sun. This is why the ‘jets’ come from the ‘high spot’s on its surface, the electric charge that is trying to ‘equalize’ with its surroundings will come off of sharp points, like a van de Graff generator will do with a thumb tack on it.
The Sun is NOT ‘heating’ (sublimating) the comet.
The reason OH radicals are found in close proximity to the comet (and mistaken for water) is because any single Oxygen that is driven off is combining with Hydrogen protons from the solar wind and making OH radicals.
http://www.universetoday.com/77426/first-close-images-of-hartley-2-its-a-peanut-with-jets/(comment section)
http://www.plasma-universe.com/99.999%_plasma
 
Last edited:

Latest Posts

Back