These tail shapes vary according to different charge-ratio values (in relation to the sun) and the stratification of dust and gases in the tail itself. Sudden neutralization of the nucleus can cause what is observed as tail separation, and curved tails form depending on whether the comet is moving "downstream" or "upstream" through the zodiacal disc (i.e., relative angular velocity). Some comets have been observed to "wander that is, change their orbital descent (e.g., hale-bopp's period changed from 4200 to 2650 years in just one passage). In McCanney's model, this is explained by the vast amount of material drawn into the comet tail. Comets are attracting these materials, not discharging them through "melting" of nonexistent ice and gas jets. This dusty material produces a gravitational drag, and has the effect of circularizing eccentric orbits, making them more uniform. As a comet's orbit becomes circular (due to tail drag it stops moving through the differently charged areas around the sun, remaining in one region of electrical equipotential, thus losing its visibly charged tail. In essence, it evolves into an asteroid or potential report moon in a stable orbit, its fiery early years over.
Besides rings and satellites, they display interplanetary electrical discharges (e.g., between Jupiter and io energetic particles, differential rotation (the equator of the sun rotates faster than the poles high temperatures, exothermic radiation, and highly energetic atmospheric lightning. According to McCanney, this lightning is actually what triggers fusion reactions (the burning of hydrogen and helium) on the sun's surface,. E., not in its core. Like the gas giants, the sun should have a solid core, where radioactive decay takes place. This brings us back to family matters and unplanned parenthood. If planets can become stars, can comets become moons or planets, and if so, how? Let's follow a comet as it essay journeys into the solar system and see what happens based on McCanney's comet capture theory. As a small comet enters the solar system, it will be seen to light up, discharging a relatively small and localized region of the capacitor. Several types of tail may be observed, in addition to the brightly lit coma.
The excess protons and other positively charged ions (including light elements up to sulfur) making up the nebular cloud and zodiacal disc (which contains the heavy elements) flow into and form the comet tail. So the comet tail has nothing to do with water vapor streaming from a melting "snowball although that's not to say that water can't be a component of a comet tail - quite the contrary. The sun is an interesting thing (seriously!). Compare it with a gas giant like saturn. Both are surrounded by a plane of stratified, ring-like structures: the familiar rings of Saturn and the sun's zodiacal disc (the dusty material spanning the plane of the ecliptic) with rings at certain distances,. G., between Mars and Jupiter. In fact, both Saturn and Jupiter exhibit certain star-like properties and electrical phenomena, leading McCanney to some interesting hypotheses.
Earth -616) marvel Database fandom powered
But there is no reason for assuming this. It would be impossible to detect the overall current leaving the sun at any given moment. The few points at which the solar wind has been monitored can in no way be extrapolated to say that there are equal currents of protons and electrons in the solar wind as has been done by theorists. G., comet phenomena and electrical phenomena in Saturn's rings, indicate that there must be an excess current of protons. In solar prominences are seen composite streamers of similarly charged particles moving in the local magnetic field, so there can be no doubt that the sun has the ability to selectively eject composite streamers of similarly charged particles. 3-Part essay Comet Paper" Part i,. Comet Arend-Roland's sunward spike - a high energy electron beam connecting the discharging comet and the sun.
Basically, electrons' movement is slightly retarded in the sun's corona, with solar flares hurling out an excess number of protons. The excess protons in the solar wind creates a separation of charge throughout the entire solar system - a giant capacitor with a positively charged, doughnut-shaped nebular cloud of dust and gases stretching to the far reaches of the solar system, and the negatively charged. An electrical potential exists between these two poles and any object moving through plasma resume regions of varying charge density will become charged, depending on its size and relative velocity. When new bodies (e.g., comets) enter this plasma region from outer space, they ignite and begin to discharge the solar capacitor. The comet nucleus acquires a negative charge, with electrons flowing towards it in the form of a sunward spike.
According to McCanney's theory (described in the paper in Appendix i the picture is pretty different, being both logical and accounting for those aforementioned "anomalies including the "missing mass" problem, the spiral shape and symmetry of galactic arms, and the surplus of twin star systems. In this model, stars and planets, as well as smaller comet nuclei, are all formed at the same time from cosmic dust continually emanating from and returning back into the galactic center. Basically, the cosmic dust collapses inward toward the nucleus, and condensed material is ejected outward in a "shotgun effect". (Because all these objects are formed in the same way, this means that stars may actually have solid cores, the source of heavy isotopes ejected in supernovae.). Ejected bodies will naturally stabilize into dual orbiting systems, explaining the observation that over 80 of star systems are actually twin-star systems, the remainder probably also being twinned, although with more introverted companions of the unlit variety (e.g., brown dwarfs or gas giants).
(Incidentally, mcCanney believes Jupiter is the sun's unlit twin, as they alone share the same spin axis among solar system bodies, but we here at sott favor the brown dwarf theory, for which Walter Cruttenden gives some evidence in his book. Lost Star of Myth and Time.) As these two bodies stabilize in their orbit of one another, they eject smaller bodies to go out into the world and find their own solar system. So where do comets come from? Aside from being rudely deflected from the sphere of our stellar young lovers, another source of comets is the material ejected from stellar novae, the small bits flying away at great speeds with the biggest bits staying behind. (This may explain the "families" of comets that appear to come from the same source in space.) These ejected bodies from the galactic center and supernovae will later be captured into the orbit of one or another of the bodies of an already-paired star system. So while stellar pairs may enforce their privacy at first, they can't forestall the inevitability of certain "cosmic accidents". But before we continue our story of cosmic "Married with Children we need a few more concepts with which to work, namely, from the plasma discharge model. McCanney writes: It has always been assumed that the solar wind contains equal currents of electrons and protons to maintain an electrically neutral solar system.
Smoking : Essay on causes and Effects
Rather, we live in an electric universe. An illustration of the current "nebular collapse" theory of solar system formation taught to all students wallpaper of space science. Let's start big, like galaxy big. According to the received wisdom, our solar system formed more or less at one time, four-point-something billion years ago (give or take a day tree or two). You can read about it on wikipedia. Basically, in the beginning was the Great Nebular Cloud, which was pretty bored and lonely being a just cloud and so collapsed and flattened into a really big Disc, out of which several varied planets and moons gradually coalesced. If it sounds like a myth, it's because it most likely.
i'll let you guess my answer to that one. I'll just say that these "anomalies" have all either been ignored or the current theories simply modified with "correcting factors" to account for the unexpected data (thus creating even more inconsistencies). The nebular theory of oss, for example, has mighty difficulty (without fudging numbers or creating new physical phenomena) explaining the formation of large proto-planets let alone data small comet nuclei in terms of gravitational collapse of gas clouds, saturn's large energy output, venus' greater energy output. The "dirty snowball comet model" (dscm in turn, can't quite wrap itself around the continual renewal of comet coma, their curvature and well defined edges, "sunward spikes" with intense radio signals coming off the nucleus, tail spiraling, etc. As McCanney points out above, any good theory must account for all of those, and more. So what does he offer instead? The "comet capture theory of oss" and the "plasma discharge comet model" (pdcm according to which our solar system, and space in general, is not electrically neutral.
by mainstream scientists. Besides accounting for these anomalies, as he explains in Part ii of his "3-Part Comet Paper included in Appendix II: Any alternate theory concerning comet behavior and the origin of the solar system (OSS) must re-explain many observed phenomena in a self-consistent context. These include the origin of comet nuclei and the reason for the observed "families" of comets arriving from many specific directions in space, comet wandering, sunward spikes, sunward fan tails, occasional separation of the tail from the nucleus, comet splitting, the cause of Type. In relating the above to the formation of planets, moons and asteroids, the theory must also explain the internal heat and radioactivity of the planets, the orientation of the rotational axes of the planets, the spacing of planetary and lunar orbits, the asteroid belt, the. This must all be done in a context consistent with data (although not necessarily with uniformitarian theory) in other fields such as geology, biology, archaeology, anthropology, etc." 3-Part Comet Paper" Part ii,. Following that, he describes what it all means for us living on planet Earth, what has happened in the past and will happen again - effects of which most scientists are either unaware or unable to speak due to signed non-disclosure agreements. But first, what exactly can't the current theories explain? Surely, there can't be any holes in the "wisdom" parroted about as if it were holy dogma these days, right? To avoid any excess sarcasm (there's enough of that already, and more to come!
Unfortunately, it seems that in all their mental excavations, the mass-produced scientists of our time have dug themselves into a trench of dreary proportions, carried along by the inertial stream of their cherished professors' naïve opinions. In fact, they can't even tell how deep they are in it, or that their theories are as woefully outdated as the mastodon fossils of which they catch passing glimpses. James McCanney's work over the last thirty-odd years, they find themselves plunged, in the words of Mullah Nasr Eddin, "into the deepest galoshes that have ever been worn on sweaty feet.". James McCanney is something of a maverick in the scientific community. Having taught physics and mathematics at Cornell University, he was ousted because of pressure put on University authorities by professors in the astronomy department who didn't like what he was publishing. In that sense, academia is a tad like life in the mob: "you can't say these things. If you do, we'll ruin you." But while McCanney may have suffered the fate of any scientist who attempts to go against the grain, his theories continue to hold up, predicting newly observed phenomena without having to resort to the "creeping crud" of widely accepted. McCanney's first book in a series presenting his ideas, writing Planet-x, comets earth Changes: a scientific Treatise on the Effects of a new Large Planet or Comet Arriving in Our Solar System and Expected Earth weather and Earth Changes, introduces his theoretical work on these topics. It's divided into thirteen short chapters describing the scientific concepts in layman's terms, followed by reprints of his original scientific papers published in the early 1980s.
Read and write learning style - top-quality research
Comments are always welcome. M press, planet-x, comets earth Changes by james. McCanney, minneapolis, mn: m press, 2007 (first published in 2002) 182. A new model of the Universe. A scientific revolution in the theories of the nature of comets, solar system formation and astronomical phenomena in general is long overdue. For example, the impossibilities and contradictions inherent in the "dirty essay snowball comet model" and the "nebular collapse" theory of the origin of the solar system are legion. The theories fall short of explaining observed phenomena, but you'll never hear the scientists promoting them admit as much.