[To v3.0 forum] > v2.0 pre-2020 archive Board Index < Electric Universe
Oumuamua - No discharge coma?
Plasma and electricity in space. Failure of gravity-only cosmology. Exposing the myths of dark matter, dark energy, black holes, neutron stars, and other mathematical constructs. The electric model of stars. Predictions and confirmations of the electric comet.
jacmac
Re: Oumuamua - No discharge coma?
Unread post by jacmac » Sun Dec 10, 2017 8:25 am
verisimilitude said:
Sweeping it under the rug opens the door to cries of hypocricy.
I suggest that a 17 minute video which says I DON"T KNOW is not sweeping anything under the rug.
This also speaks to the mainstream willingness to ignore falsifying data, to not say I DON"T KNOW,
because there is not a fully formed alternate theory ready to adopt.
Unread post by Webbman » Sun Dec 10, 2017 8:33 am
I would consider it a one off until weve seen a bunch of these things with much stronger documentation.
they say its red but red with no dust. Sounds like a chunk of iron. Will magnetized iron discharge a coma?
also the location is suspect to me since it is between the earth and the sun and the pics of it are all nighttime when the telescopes would be pointed the other way. Hawaii is on the equator after all.
Unread post by Solar » Sun Dec 10, 2017 8:56 am
I don't understand the conundrum. Sometimes objects exhibit tail and coma; sometimes they do not - as has been observed countless times:
When is an asteroid not an asteroid? When it turns out to be a comet, of course. Has this ever happened before? Why, yes it has. In fact it was just announced December 12, 2010 that the asteroid (596) Scheila has sprouted a tail and coma! This is likely a comet that has been masquerading as an asteroid. - ASTEROID SCHEILA SPROUTS A TAIL AND COMA
A prime example of how the conceptual naming conventions can change at a moments notice depending on whether or not "flare up", "outburst" and/or "outgassing" is in effect. As the article states there are comets that behave as asteroids and then there are asteroids that behave as comets. The observational extent of Oumuamua has been far too short too discern any such activity and for all anyone knows the object could have been observed during its asteroid phase. Its too small and moving too fast to get clear images of surface details. Since objects can (and do) exhibit BOTH asteroid and comet behavior there should be no expectation that any and every object that enters the solar system needs to display "outgassing", outburst", or "discharge" activity.
In this example, as the above article showcases, object Schelia was known by its cometary name 133P/Elst-Pizarro, but it is also known as Asteroid (596) Scheila.
Anyways: There are stitched images of "Oumuamua—an asteroid or a comet…" (phrased exactly so beneath one of the captions) here:
Other than expectations and speculations I don't see anything problematic about this object at all. Oumuamua could have easily flared up months before the observational timeframe and coasted along for the duration of the observational period behaving like an asteroid, which its how it is now categorized. Both the EU and the dirty snowball analysis incorporate this possibility. Unless Oumuamua can be tracked for an extended period of time in order to observe long term activity every ounce of speculation from both camps is being based on a snapshot of a speeding bullet.
There already exist plenty of evidence showcasing the active-inactive qualities of these kinds of celestial objects. Oumuamua was like a bad date. It happened too fast to base any long term theoretical relationship on and yet; people seem to be trying to establish something meaningful out of why the prospect wasn't better dressed for the occasion.
"Our laws of force tend to be applied in the Newtonian sense in that for every action there is an equal reaction, and yet, in the real world, where many-body gravitational effects or electrodynamic actions prevail, we do not have every action paired with an equal reaction." — Harold Aspden
Michael Mozina
Location: Mt. Shasta, CA
Contact Michael Mozina
Unread post by Michael Mozina » Sun Dec 10, 2017 10:02 am
verisimilitude wrote: The EU comet model looked to be on stable footing until this happened.
Do I expect a rapid response? Of course not; who am I to make such demands? But as a neutral party leaning toward the EU explanation, I do feel a measured response is terribly important.
Define "measured response". As someone with no significant interest in the outcome, even I can see that the composition, the unusual shape of the object, and the trajectory of the asteroid could play a significant role in whether or not it forms an obvious tail. This is after all a highly unusual asteroid. It hardly seems like it would be practical or prudent to base an entire theory on a single, unique event. Even if it's an exception, does that mean that the rule doesn't apply in most instances?
After all, from the outside looking in, EU is staring at a failed prediction. Saying it's OK because LCDM commonly makes failed predictions is unprofessional.
I don't see anyone here suggesting that it's 'ok' to ignore this observation only because LCMD is littered with gigantic prediction failures of it's own, but I also don't see why EU models/theories should be held to a much higher standard, and judged solely based on one unique event. It seems to me that a 'measured" response work both ways.
EU needs to handle this with humility, and more importantly, with solid scientific reasoning.
As opposed to the mainstream SOP of simply sweeping it's problems under the rug, most recently that massive quasar that doesn't fit with their evolutionary models, two order of magnitude failed solar convection predictions, or billions of dollars worth of failed dark matter "tests"?
I'm really unclear about how one would define a "measured" response from a single unusual event. This is after all the first such observation of it's kind. Are it's critics showing any humility or any signs of "solid scientific reasoning"? Admittedly there's a need to review the theory in light of these observations, but a single failed prediction is almost never used to falsify an entire model in astronomy.
Remember, nucleosynthesis was nonstandard until it was proven. Now it's part if the Standard Model. EU comet theory also has a shot at being absorbed.
Sure, as does every other aspect of EU/PC solar models and cosmology concepts.
And that opens the door to more funding, more projects and more satellite time. So, yeah, you may like the sublimation theory, or just not care; I'd like to think EU is on to something and have an interest in seeing their work rewarded.
I hear you, and I think most of us agree with you too, but it's unclear to me what a "measured' response to a single, highly unusual event might be? It's not like I really care one way or the other mind you, but I'd hate to see the whole idea be thrown out the windows based upon a single 'exception' rather than the rule before we even begin to understand much about this particular object. Does the composition make a difference? Does it's travel through interstellar space make a difference? Does the shape of the object have an influence? Does the trajectory compared to the plane of the elliptic have some influence on the outcome? Does the orbital eccentricity play a role? How would we decide such things *before* any real funding or investigation takes place?
nick c
Unread post by nick c » Sun Dec 10, 2017 10:08 am
Why do not spacecraft exhibit cometary qualities?
Unread post by seasmith » Sun Dec 10, 2017 10:16 am
nick c wrote: Why do not spacecraft exhibit cometary qualities?
Because they are not dielectric bodies ?
Metryq
Unread post by Metryq » Sun Dec 10, 2017 11:12 am
It will turn out that the reddish coloring of Oumuamua is Bakelite plastic insulating the body.
Unread post by nick c » Sun Dec 10, 2017 3:39 pm
Correct, and this applies to Oumuanua. It is not dielectric because it is too small to maintain any significant (that would result in an obvious visual cometary display) of charge differential with respect to the ambient electrical environment.
The recent Space News:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qisQ5_LadBQ
The small size is mentioned as a possible explanation at 11:06 of the video.
...the smaller nucleus would mean lower capacitance...
Also, consider the elongated shape as mentioned at around 08:50 of the video. The diameter of the cylinder is measured in yards/meters.
It is my thinking that though the electrical effects may not be obvious, they are still there though subtle due to the small size and shape. I would not be surprised if it fissions into two or more objects at some point, as these would be the end phase of a dissipating electric comet.
[That of course is my speculation and not the responsibility of any of the TB team]
Unread post by verisimilitude » Sun Dec 10, 2017 4:41 pm
Nick gave a measured response. Solar as well. Mozina and I get emotional
The question "what quantifies as too small" has my interest.
Unread post by Michael Mozina » Sun Dec 10, 2017 10:32 pm
verisimilitude wrote: Nick gave a measured response. Solar as well. Mozina and I get emotional
I prefer to think of it as "passionate", but ya.....
Unread post by seasmith » Sun Dec 10, 2017 10:38 pm
nick c wrote:
The ISS has a piece of hardware called the PCU (Plasma Contactor Unit). The PCU uses a hollow cathode assembly to create a low impedance plasma bridge in order to control the spacecraft potential with respect to the local space plasma potential. Here's a picture of the PCU. It's located on the Z1-Truss.
https://www.quora.com/How-are-electroni ... ed-And-why
Shapes too for sure, like the tuned exhausts on your roadster
Unread post by Solar » Mon Dec 11, 2017 6:51 pm
verisimilitude wrote: The question "what quantifies as too small" has my interest.
Nothing qualifies as too small. Its the behavior that counts.
The small comets are a million times smaller than these more famous comets. The small comets also contain little dust and lack the iron and other metals necessary to make them glow brightly and produce a tail like the larger comets. But what they have in common--and the reason they were dubbed "small comets" in the first place--is that they are both largely made of water. - The Small Comets Frequently Asked Questions List
These "small comets", sometimes referred to as "small bodies", were deduced to exist as a result of observations which revealed "atmospheric holes". The very first sentence under the title hotlinks these words "the original discovery papers" - to the actual papers containing images of same. Its very interesting.
On the other hand the smallest asteroid reported by some sources was six feet wide Near-Earth Asteroid 2015 TC25. Also see this Space.com article.
The presence of a coma and/or tail bestows the label "comet", or "comet-like", whereas the lack thereof bestows the name "asteroid". Size does not appear to affect the classification scheme for either case. Of further relevance to this thread a sentence on University of Hawaii's Oumuamua page reads:
Astronomers estimate that an interstellar asteroid similar to `Oumuamua passes inside the orbit of Earth several times year, but they are faint and hard to spot, so they have been missed up until now. It is only recently that survey telescopes, such as Pan-STARRS, are powerful enough to have a chance to discover them. "Our successful follow-up observations are a model for the future - especially when the next major survey telescope, LSST, comes on line," added Meech.
This research is presented in a paper entitled "A brief visit from a red and extremely elongated interstellar asteroid", by K. Meech et al., appears in the journal Nature on November 20, 2017.
The discovery of the first interstellar object, `Oumuamua, was made possible by the worldwide effort presently being made to discover Near-Earth Objects- Earth's First Known Interstellar Visitor Unmasked
Pan-STARRS is apparently first to observe an IO and there will be followup observations; thus the excitement over Oumuamua. Yet, there are estimates that similar objects classified as "Interstellar" pass "inside the orbit of Earth several times year, but they are faint and hard to spot, so they have been missed up until now." This is the beginning of an ongoing study. It remains to be seen how these little ones will behave individually and/or as a collective (shared velocity, shared trajectories would be interesting - for example).
nick c wrote: It is my thinking that though the electrical effects may not be obvious, they are still there though subtle ...
Agreed. Asteroids may appear electrically docile but NASA knows in no uncertain terms that this is merely appearance:
"For example, understanding the electrical environment around an asteroid could help identify locations where astronauts can safely make first contact with the object," said co-author William Farrell of NASA's Goddard Space Flight Center in Greenbelt, Maryland. "If an astronaut is tethered to a spacecraft that is in sunlight and positively charged, and touches a negatively charged asteroid surface in shadow, there could be an unexpected current flow between the two systems upon contact. We simply can't speculate on the nature of that current without this model." - NASA Model Gives Glimpse into the Invisible World of Electric Asteroids
Considering that these bodies can transition from one phase to another - composition differences, CME interaction, planetary magneto-tails, Co-rotating Interaction Regions constitute a very short list of potential environmental factors that might influence these two behaviors. As opposed to expecting every rocky/porous object that enters the solar system to automatically undergo comet Haley-like behavior, long-term observation becomes the axis of purview. There simply hasn't bee enough of that to even begin speculating IMHO.
That being said, and even with "flare-ups" no one correlates the environmental factors in order to assess which one, or more, might be responsible for inducing more intense activity. To me, the current snapshot of Oumuamua cannot be used to substantiate anything in either camp save its present phase as a small [electrical] interstellar asteroid per NASA.
Nice PCU reference Seasmith.
Unread post by verisimilitude » Tue Dec 12, 2017 5:05 pm
Thank you, Solar, for the trove of linked data. Much appreciated.
Unread post by Cargo » Tue Dec 12, 2017 7:49 pm
After all, from the outside looking in, EU is staring at a failed prediction. Saying it's OK because LCDM commonly makes failed predictions is unprofessional. EU needs to handle this with humility, and more importantly, with solid scientific reasoning.
Your funny. EU has made no predictions about this unknown object.
interstellar filaments conducted electricity having currents as high as 10 thousand billion amperes
Unread post by verisimilitude » Tue Dec 12, 2017 10:33 pm
Cargo wrote: Your funny. EU has made no predictions about this unknown object.
EU has made general predictions about what should happen to objects moving into the inner solar system from the outer solar system. This object did not play along, hence my concerns (which have been addressed.)
Return to "Electric Universe"