Comet ISON - Quark Stars and Neutron Love.

disregard, a bit unrelated to smj of post

Last Edited by Children of the Atom on 05/27/2013 02:42 AM

Check out this video from the BBC talking about neutron stars, this was 2008...when ISON wasn't even discovered yet

Ohhhh, a press release! Well then! That must be the truth!

Use one of the innumerable links describing the electric universe on this thread and realize the neutron star is constructed by the satan-run current acadimia to support a working view of the universe that does not work and is plain to a layman is plain stupid.

Please direct your considerable efforts in a direction aimed at thruth that is befiting a conspiracy website.

Please work to discredit the stupid view of cosmology that is obviously wrong even to a smart grade fiver yet recieves 100% of funding whereas the obviously right cosmos view gets 0%.

Please dude, look into it and fight the good fight.

i dont know why but i want to keep this thread alive till the time ISON come

I remember the hype about elenin. But others tend to forget and just play with another dooms day.
Humanity has survived the last million years. What makes you think there will be anything different happening now.
I think a lot of you are just tired of life with no direction to follow, so you hope something drastic to happen and release you from the bond you have imposed on yourselves.

Riiight, did you bother reading the thread?

No?

Thought so.

I will do a follow up with new information in a new thread. Once we can get some results of the spin on the nucleus and some other signatures, we will know for certain what it is.

I'm a skeptic that it's a comet and NASA sure is being a prude!

Before you do a follow up you should reconsider your original post.

.

And, if the new information shows that it's a comet, will you believe it, or will you dismiss it as a conspiracy? Until ISON passes without incident, at which point either ignore that you claimed ISON-doom or you make an excuse (like "GLP saved the planet again!") and turn your attention to the next Doom Candidate du jour.

Man, did you have to actually write that long diatribe out?

If NASA would simply give us some good footage of C2012 S1, there wouldn't be anything to discuss and why is it such a 'hugely interesting object'? That's their words, not mine.

People like you should be ashamed because you shun people asking genuine questions.

If you cannot handle a mature discussion, I am sorry because that is your problem and not mine.

Except, you are not asking a genuine question if you insist on not trusting or not accepting the answers.

There is nothing more annoying than someone saying "why is this happening", but then dismissing the answer because it comes from NASA or someone who has a lot of knowledge in the matter.

Last Edited by phoomp on 05/27/2013 11:47 PM

i don't think you watched the video in its entirety or understood my post.

we're aware of what the 'official' stance is from the 'scientific' community. you continue to ignore our premise that information is withheld, and some lies are deliberately published.

you're implying that the top levels of the 'authority' on the matter are completely transparent, publish everything they know, hide nothing, and never lie; and that those indoctrinated by said 'authority' can be trusted.

And, you're implying that anyone who corroborates what those "top levels of the authority" say, even if those people are independant and amateur, is complicit in the conspiracy you're imagining.

If it's from the "YouTube University" it must be true.

Sorry, but I don't go through 80 minutes of bullshit, I can waste my time in a more pleasant way - and if they claim in the video, our sun is from the Sagittarius dwarf, it is bullshit.

The motion of stars in relation to our sun is well known. There are stars that can be assigned to the sagittarius dwarf because of their different motion.
And our sun is not one of them.

I gave you a link - read it.

.

Slowly I'm starting to be in a pissy mood because of your replies.



They gave and give.



Really? I'm quite confident, regardless how much information would be available about ISON, there would be a conspiracy.
People like you need their daily doom, they are adicted to doom.



C/2012 S1 (ISON) is a 'hugely interesting object'
* because it's most likely a first timer to the inner solar system
* because the composition is of interest
* because it's of interest to determin its origin (outer space or solar system) from the isotop composition
* because it's of interest if it survives perihelion since it passes within the Roche limit
* because it's of interest to determin what kind of material it evaporates at what distances
...



Regarding your "neuton star":
It seems, that 100% of you comet-doom-tards are unable to produce even one logical thought.

As you yourself stated, a neutron star (regardless of its size of only 10 km to 15 km) has at least 1.5 times the mass of our sun.
What do you think, an object with 1.5 solar mass would do to our solar system?
At this time at least Saturn and Jupiter would have a highly excentric orbit far above the ecliptic.
Mars would be at the position of the asteroid belt.
Earth, in a highly excentric orbit too, most probably already had lost its moon.
Venus and Merkury would be on its way out of our solar system.
All this because of the gravitational attraction of a neutron star at Jupiters distance.
And since our sun would not be any more the heaviest body in our solar system, the sun itself would move into the direction of the neutron star.

Do you have any reports of any astronomer (amateur or professional) around the world of these events, that would be well visible to every body?
Or any reports of the oceans boiling off because Earth would be in parts of its excentric orbit as close to the sun as Venus?
To the contrary, we just had an annular solar eclipse this month, that happened as calculated decades ago.
Proof, that neither the sun nor the moon is out of place and ISON is not a neutron star.


And where did you get the "light curve of a neutron star"?
Just a Google picture search or from this side? [link to abyss.uoregon.edu]

If you got it from the mentioned site, it proves, that you either have no clue about what you have read or that you are deliberately lying to the readers.
This is not the light curve of a neutron star.
This is the lightcurve of a backgraound star, when a neutron star passes /from Earth viewpoint) in front of it.
The magnitude of the background star is amplified as the gravity of the neutron star acts as a converging lens.


And of course you (deliberately ?) ignored the objection of another member regarding the comparison of photos from ISON with Hale-Bopp.
Yes, it's simply stupid to compare photos from Hale-Bopp, taken at a distance of 35 million kilometers, with photos of a comet (with a nucleus 20 times smaller) at a distance of 600 million kilometers and come to the conclusion, ISON is not a comet.


Since these three points make 3/4 of your initial post, 3/4 of your initial post are utter bullshit.
Shall I look for the rest?


.

Hydra, you have to be one of the biggest assholes on GLP. For one, I was talking to Phomp, so fuck your 'pissy' attitude, I give no fucks.

Secondly, everything I used was from the horses mouth, I asked questions.

You answered none!

Until then, fuck off or take some motion pictures of ISON for us.

I agree most of that doesn't make logical sense. It also doesn't make any logical sense that this object is emitting 144 Million pounds of "dust" per day with a nucleus of 3-4 KM. It doesn't make sense that it has a huge tail far outside the inner solar system. Don't comets only develop meaningful sized tails when they get close to the sun?

I think we're all just questioning this, not need to get mad and worked up. Most of this makes no sense. I've got a science background (I'm an engineer), but I just don't know enough about astrophysics to definitively say yes or no to most things.

Could this be a quark star (smaller mass). It just really seems to me this thing has substantial mass and gravity. That's the only thing I can think of that would explain the enormous tail, the high speed going around the sun, the enormous discharge, etc.

Well said OP!

The haters just don't get it, and their bs is getting so tired and boring...yawn...never anything original in their rebuttals,just mindless chatter

For more info on ISON.

AC 975341, you have to be one of the biggest assholes on GLP. For one, I was talking to Children of the Atom, so fuck your 'pissy' attitude, I give no fucks.


No - I'm not serious. But this is how Children of the Atom thinks a forum works.
Of course you are free to comment to my posts as well as anybody else.





It does make logical sense.



As an engineer you could have done the math.

Let's assume the comet is a sphere (in reality it is not a sphere but most likely elongated - so I will take the smaller diameter of 3km for the calculation.)

Volume of a sphere: V = 4/3 * pi * r^3
Diameter of the nucleus = 3km - radius of the nucleus = 1.5km
1.5km = 1,500m = 15,000dm
Volume of a sphere with r = 15,000dm = 14,137,166,941,154dm^3 = 14,137,166,941,154 liter
Specific weight of the comets material (on average) = 1 g/cm3 to 0.9 g/cm3
So 1 dm^3 or liter of comet material is 0.9 kg to 1 kg
14,137,166,941,154 liter * 0.9 kg = 12,723,450,247,038 kg

Assuming your numbers above are correct: 1 lbs = 0.455 kg
So ISON sublimates 144,000,000 lbs = 65,520,000 kg material per day

Weight of the nucleus: 12,723,450,247,038 kg
Weight loss per day due to sublimation: 65,520,000 kg
That gives ISON a life time of 194,191 days or 532 years at present sublimation rate.

Of course the sublimation rate will drastically increase when ISON comes close to the sun.
On the other hand there is no sublimation in the vast majority of its orbit.
Even at a 10 fold sublimation rate the comet has more than 50 years.

Astonishing, isn't it? I made the calculation with Hale-Bopp because I had this thoughts too.



Comets are not only dust, water ice and dry ice (CO2). Comets contain a lot of other gases that sublimate at far lower temperatures as CO2 or water ice, e.g. methane.
Since ISON (most probably) makes it first visit to the inner solar system, it still contains all these volatile gases. And these gases start sublimating already beyond the orbit of Jupiter.
This is also an explanation for the observed drop in brightness vs the calculated brightness: ISON is running out of volatile gases and the sublimation of CO2 and water ice didn't yet start.
The further development and brightness of ISON depends on the amount of CO2 and water ice it has.

Under this circumstances the tail lenght of 90,000 km is nothing unusual. When it comes closer to perihelion the tail may extend to some ten million kilometers or more. E.g. comet Hyakutake had about the same nucleus size and a tail close to perihelion of 500 million kilometers, the longest observed until now.



No, a quark star is a hypothetical star, a neutron star whose inner core consists of so called degenerated matter (neutrons broken up into quarks)
Since a (hypothetical) quark star is only a variation of a neutron star my above described scenario applies.



As to the tail see above.

The speed is just a matter of the orbit. The closer the comet comes to the sun, the greater the gravitational attraction, the greater the speed.

For those interested:
Here is a nice calculation, that the 3600 year orbit of "Nobiru" is unstable.
In the same way you can calculate the orbit and speed of comets.


.

See the start of my post above.



Sure you did - you mixed apples and peaches and the outcome was shit.



No, you didn't.
All I can see in your initial post are rhetorical questions and questions you answered by yourself.

If you had asked questions, I had responded earlier.



Since you didn't ask any questions, the logical consequence is: I didn't answer any questions.

But I exposed your bullshit about:
ISON could be a neutron star
The alleged light curve of a neutron star
Your bullshit comparison of photos from hHale-Bopp and ISON



Ad hominem noted.


.

Do you also have anything useful to contribute?


.

Btw, Child, as you can see from my posts above: What goes around, comes around.

.

There you are, don't tread where you can barely breathe.







You and your flat earth science will fade away with the rest, enjoy repeating 3rd grade. Literally

I thought it was interesting they had the Starship Enterprise visiting Nibiru at the beginning of the new Star Trek movie.