As comet Lovejoy approaches, the Sun's acivity flatlines!!! Electric Universe?

Lovejoy calmed the Sun...

How does this prove that the EU is not science? That would be like saying the fact that this comet the size of two football fields didn`t break up at perihelion disproves the consensus view of cosmology. And btw it is quite ridiculous to say that a "dirty snowball" exposed to millions of degrees in the corona could survive this passage.

I say; let`s agree that we don`t have all the answers yet and our best way of coming closer to the truth is by observing what is actually happening.

Last Edited by Nacht im Walde on 12/16/2011 03:55 PM

Power is no desire.
I couldn't care less about your motivations to post in certain threads. I only find it peculiar your remarks in this instance contribute nothing to this thread.
So my advice would be to spend your infinite wisdom and profound insights with someone that's not so blunt to question established "science".

Feel free to comment from your point of view on this matter.
But I can only guess you have no clue regarding this subject. Theories have caught up with science.

Note: you haven't pointed out anything.

[link to www.solarham.com]

We will see if this sudden and peculiar lull in solar activity is a predecessor to something else sudden and peculiar.

There seems to be some activity coming back in some areas

Nothing? That's your opinion, and not a surprising one at that.

I question established science constantly, but you don't even see the double standard you're applying. You don't seem to see or care that every time solar activity flares up when a sungrazer approaches its taken as "proof" that EU is correct, and now when the sun does nothing it's also taken as "proof" that EU is correct. The level of confirmation bias is simply staggering.

Then you're not even reading my posts.

It's so funny to watch you guys try to argue that a lack of solar activity proves your "theory." It's the opposite of what the theory previously claimed. Not the first time I've seen the "theory" suddenly shift "predictions." I think I'll start calling it the phenomenon of "postdiction."

If that's your level of understanding of what a comet is... let's just say, that explains a lot...

Finally something exciting going on in space again.

Question is. where is Lovejoy heading now,
and what would it have to be made of, to withstand that kind of heat?
Why didn`t the sun protect it`s self when it got too close?
Probably something to do with Lovejoys properties?

So many questions..........

If EU theory is correct, then one should expect 3 different "charges" for comets, i.e., positive, negative, and neutral.

This means one should expect 3 different kinds of reaction from the Sun due to incoming comets, one violent, one calming, or none.

Just my 2 centavos.

I'm not seeking proof of anything. I was merely theorizing if two facts (comet and lack of solar activity) could have a connection.

I do read posts, especially in my own thread, and the only thing you have pointed out is solely speculation.

The point you're making regarding EU is that when two outcomes of a similar event are not consistent, there is no connection at all.
So you assume every comet is the same and behaves the same. Imo that's speculation, not science.

look, I`m not claiming to be an expert on the EU or mainstream cosmology. Far from it, but instead of wipping us all here with your great intellect, enlighten us. How does a dusty and icy comet survive such a close encounter of millions of degrees? And while you are at it please tell us why there hasn`t been any real answer to the coronal heating problem in all these years, the sunspot enigma or why comets start to "melt" when they are still far aways from the sun as Hale-Bopp did, or (... the list goes on and on). With so many unexplainable things, there is obviously a problem with the current theory.

Where did I state that a lack of solar activity proves the EU? If you want to challenge yourself do yourself a favor and read this:

[link to thunderbolts.info]

Last Edited by Nacht im Walde on 12/16/2011 05:01 PM

If you're looking at Goes X-Ray, Nict or some of the data that depends on Ace seeing and transmitting, well, I pretty sure 24 hours prior to the comet arriving, that sat was moved. What this will mean is a drop off in "what" it sees and sends home. I figure in the next 24-36 hours, as they move the sat back to position, you will see the levels come back up.

To be perfectly honest, I don't think Nasa was 100% sure this wouldn't impact. That is why almost all the sat feeds, SDO, Stereo, Soho from them, went down for many hours during the close pass.

Link?

I don`t understand what you are saying. I doubt that NASA would have moved any sat simply because of a comet (and as far as they are concerned there isn`t a threat from a comet hitting the sun).

But didn't Elenin disintegrate when it went around the sun?

So why didn't Lovejoy? This very strange.

More importantly, the comet is developing a new tail, so what is this tail made of?

My point is that EU tries to shoehorn any outcome as "proof" regardless of whether the sun becomes more active or not. It's a lovely little postdiction. You don't even see the double standard, it's worse than speculation, it's just pure bias.

Two different reactions for two different types of comets?

So if it does anything or nothing, voila, proof! LOL, you guys crack me up.

Well the EU says that comets are made up of solid rock. It is the charge difference in the solar system that (positive near the sun) that creates the visbile tail; no ice required. Although it is still amazing for a rock to survive such a close encounter, it is far more likely than a piece of dust and ice.

Actually, if the Sun consistently does not show any reaction to incoming comets, I will think that comets really are nothing more than dirty snowballs.

yeah, this is wrong. the poster didn`t read up on the EU. And btw Astromut, it just goes to show how little you really know about the EU, if you don`t even know what we are actually saying. How can you then try to ridicule this theory, if you don`t know what our understanding is?

Newsflash, the sun can happen to have an outburst at the same time a comet approaches due to random chance alone. If it was consistently inactive every time a comet went by that would indicate a correlation. That's the point, there's no consistency at all.

Comet Neat and CME's

When a coronal mass ejection greeted Comet NEAT, space scientists called it a “coincidence”. But in an electric universe such events deserve a second look.

As NEAT raced through the extended solar atmosphere, a large coronal mass ejection (CME) exploded from the Sun and appeared to strike the comet. The comet responded with a “kink” that propagated down the tail. A video clip of the event can be seen here. (The disk in the center is created by the coronograph as it blocks the Sun’s glare). For astronomers, the event illustrated the dynamic interactions between comets and the solar wind.

Scientists were quick to point out that meeting with ejected material was a “chance encounter”. But was it? Though electrical theorists assert no interpretation of the event at this time, they reject the theoretical assumptions that prompt mainstream theorists to dismiss out of hand any possibility that a comet could trigger an eruption from the Sun. If the Sun is a glow discharge at the center of an electric field, and a comet carries a strong negative charge together with a vast envelope of charged particles, the categorical dismissal of mutual interactions is premature.

[link to www.thunderbolts.info]

But you are assuming these outbursts are all random chance alone.

Last Edited by The Opened Scroll on 12/16/2011 05:33 PM

Oh cute, competing EU'ists, all with their own pet theories. Guess what, that's not my problem. Makes it easy for you to play a no true scotsman fallacy though. If someone says something that embarrasses the relig-err-"theory," no problem, just come out and say that they don't represent "true" EU'ism.

That you pointed out already. I'm aware of that.

It's not a double standard, it's two different outcomes with the same common cause.
You cannot dispute the theory of the Electric Universe with an inconsistent outcome of events.

If they're caused by comets, then where's the outburst when this one went right by, the largest sungrazer ever? Oh right, it didn't do anything.