Deep Impact Predictions

[dmjspace]

As scientists know (or at least *should* know but often seem to forget), the hallmark of true science is <b> prediction. </b><br /><br />NASA's upcoming holiday Deep Impact mission will, if all goes well, impact comet Tempel 1 on Independence Day. <br /><br />NASA has arranged a host of scenarios to accomodate any result, but the accepted model of comets insists that comets are "dirty snowballs." The bulk of scientists expect this model to be confirmed in one way or another by Deep Impact.<br /><br />There is a long-standing feud between the dirty snowball model and the "exploded planet hypothesis" (EPH) and Deep Impact is presenting us with one of those far-too-rare opportunities to pit an "alternative" theory against a rather well-entrenched (though ailing) mainstream theory.<br /><br />The EPH predicts one and only one scenario: Tempel 1 is an asteroid. More accurately, all comets are asteroids. In other words, they are rocky bodies, NOT snowballs. (In fact, many mainstream scientists have already quietly accepted a sneaky terminology change from "dirty snowball" to "snowy dirtball" in a tacit nod toward the EPH model's successes.)<br /><br />Prediction is the hallmark of science. The EPH predicts the Deep Impact probe will impact solid rock and vaporize, creating a small crater (no more than 30m) and a transient dust cloud. It will otherwise have no effect on the "comet."<br /><br />See the EPH's specific predictions here, then compare them to the frantic post-impact mainstream backpeddling sure to occur after the data are in.

 

[geos]

* According to the cosmic electricians, everything we have learned about comets challenges the old paradigm:<br /> * the premature discharging of comets beyond the orbit of Jupiter, where known icy bodies do not sublimate under solar radiation.<br /> * the repeated "surprise" of water content well below expectations—or no evidence of surface water at all.<br /> * the unexplained outbursts of dust, some even beyond the orbit of Saturn.<br /> * the narrow energetic jets from comet nuclei, defying the expectations for sublimating ices.<br /> * the "shocking" breakup or explosion of comet nuclei as they race toward the Sun.<br /> * the high energy X-rays from comets.<br /> * the sharply sculpted surfaces of comet nuclei (quite the opposite of the expected softening of features in melting chunks of ice).<br /> * the coherent filaments and "knots" of comet tails, often extending for many millions of miles without dissipating.<br /> * the mysterious "anti-tails" or "anomalous tails" of various comets, projecting toward the Sun, not away from it.<br /><br />These features are expected in the Electric Universe model. In that model, cometary intruders are highly negatively charged in relation to the Sun. The Sun is the positively charged body—the anode—at the center of an electric field reaching past the planets to the remote "heliopause." The heliopause is the insulating sheath or electrical boundary that mediates between the electric potential of the Sun and that of interstellar space. As a comet approaches the Sun from more remote, negative regions, it grows increasingly out of balance with its surroundings and begins to discharge electrically. All the surprising and anomalous observations in the previous list are typical characteristics of electrical discharges in plasma.<br /><br />Furthermore, the Electric Universe rejects the traditional story of the formation of all the bodies of the solar system at one early epoch. In the electrical model, comets a

 

[mrmorris]

<font color="yellow">"...fresh in from the Oort. "</font><br /><br />*sniff*<br /><br />Mmmmmm. I love the smell of fresh Oort NH3 in the morning.

 

[bushuser]

So what do you get when your comet has circled the sun for several eons? A stale rock from which the volatile chemicals have mostly sublimated away.<br /><br />It makes you wonder how many "asteroids" started as comets.

 

[cyrostir]

could it be possible for the impactor to go straight through the comet, or possible shatter it.......?

 

[cyrostir]

that would be awesome!<br />it would be super-bright if it shattered, right?<br /><br />and if it were earth crossing, nasa would be in big trouble...haha

 

[dmjspace]

<i> It could shatter. Comets are notorious for falling into pieces. </i><br /><br />Two comets hardly suffices for "notorious."<br /><br />By the way, the Oort cloud is likely imaginary. It was merely invented to find a source for the comets that shouldn't be here because their orbits should've long decayed.<br /><br />Until recently, asteroids and comets were emphatically NOT supposed to have satellites. That was one of the main predictions of the "solar nebula" hypothesis favored by astronomers. <br /><br />On the other hand, the EPH <i> predicted </i> satellites as a natural consequence of the hypothesized planetary breakup.<br /><br />You'll note that JPL has outlined an array of possible findings:<br /><br />*Probe flies through comet and comes out the other side <br />*Probe fractures comet into thousands of pieces that fly off <br />*Probe enters jello-like, compression-controlled rubble pile and makes a small, deep crater <br />*Probe impacts on weak, gravity-controlled surface and makes a huge, medium-depth crater <br />*Probe vaporizes on rocky, strength-controlled surface and makes a small, shallow crater <br /><br />As Van Flandern notes: <b> "The dirty snowball model is not sure what will happen, but has an explanation ready for each possibility. In that way, the model will not be placed at risk of falsification." </b><br /><br />The EPH model is putting itself at risk by predicting a specific scenario (number five in the list above).<br /><br />This is what viable models do. This is what real scientists do.

 

[mrmorris]

<font color="yellow">"The EPH model is putting itself at risk by predicting a specific scenario (number five in the list above). <br /><br />This is what viable models do. This is what real scientists do. "</font><br /><br />That's strange. It's been a long time since my last science class, but I thought there was a thing called a hypothesis where you make the best guess based on the data you have. I thought these were generally stated with a caveat indicating why you were making the statement. If you don't have enough information to make a single hypothsis, you might make several -- each with an explanation of what the basis is for making that particular statement.<br /><br />I suppose a particular <b>type</b> of scientist might make a definitive statement, despite having insufficient information for making it. I suppose that some people would then point to that as a virtue.<br /><br />From your posts, I gather that if the EPH predicted behavior does not occur -- all of the EPH theorists are simply going to walk away from this concept and we'll never hear word of it again. Right? No backpedalling will happen -- because they're betting the farm on this one event. Cool. We'll see.

 

[yurkin]

There is no way for the chunks from the exploded planet to get dispersed all throughout the Kuiper belt. Even in billions of years they wouldn’t be dispersed in that pattern. The Kuiper belt way have been formed from several larger comets like Pluto. Successes collisions have broken them up into smaller chunks. But to say that they all came from just one or two planets doesn’t seem like the most likely. In fact I’d bet that it can be ruled out mathematically.<br /><br />Even if they did I don’t see how this would make a difference with respect to the comets composition. If a planet formed in the vicinity of the Kuiper belt and was then destroyed its composition would be no different then multiple smaller bodies that formed at that that same distance. <br />Unless it’s mantle may have differentiated to some degree before explosion. But if that was the case then there majority of the chunks would be more icy not less icy. And if it was a chunk from the former planets core then it would be no different then an asteroid. There would be no observed out gassing, tails and certainly no cases of it ever breaking apart.

 

[dmjspace]

mrmorris said: <font color="yellow"> That's strange. It's been a long time since my last science class, but I thought there was a thing called a hypothesis where you make the best guess based on the data you have. </font><br /><br />Yes, but you have to incorporate ALL the data and choose the theory that best fits the data. Otherwise you end up discarding observations that don't fit the theory, or <i> accommodating </i> new data, i.e. "patching" models. It tends to lead to increasing complexity in models, such as invention of unpredicted new variables like "dark matter" and "dark energy" and "Oort clouds."<br /><br /><font color="yellow"> If you don't have enough information to make a single hypothsis, you might make several -- each with an explanation of what the basis is for making that particular statement. </font><br /><br />If you feel as if you need to "cover your bases" with multiple outcomes, then it's pretty clear your working hypothesis is insufficient to explain all the data.<br /><br /><font color="yellow"> From your posts, I gather that if the EPH predicted behavior does not occur -- all of the EPH theorists are simply going to walk away from this concept and we'll never hear word of it again. Right? No backpedalling will happen -- because they're betting the farm on this one event. Cool. We'll see. </font><br /><br />Yes, we'll see. What I am more to eager to see, however, is whether the proponents of the dirty snowball model will discard their model in favor of the observational evidence, should that be warranted.

 

[dmjspace]

Hicup said: <font color="yellow"> Hmmm...Until recently there was "NO" known way for a burnt out star to re-ignite either. Actually I would submit that an exploding planet is at least envisionable. </font><br /><br />Yes, there are a number of theories that could lead to planetary body-sized explosions.<br /><br />See, for example, Planetary Explosion Mechanisms.

 

[dmjspace]

Van Flandern talks about the Kuiper belt objects here.

 

[dmjspace]

steve blathered: <font color="yellow"> It's a safe bet this is one of those pseudoscience websites so well known on the net. </font><br /><br />If it's so well known, one might think a diehard pseudoskeptic such as yourself would be familiar with it.<br /><br />Yeah, Van Flandern's a real quack, what with his silly Ph.D. from Yale and former title as Chief of the Celestial Mechanics Branch at the U.S. Naval Observatory.<br /><br />Someone should've consulted with stevehw33 before letting those crazy editors at <i> Nature, </i> <i> Science </i> and <i> Physics Letters A </i> publish Van Flandern.<br /><br /><img src="/images/icons/rolleyes.gif" />

 

[tom_hobbes]

A gag too good to be ignored Mr Morris! It'd make a great 'geek' T-shirt! <img src="/images/icons/smile.gif" /> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p><font size="2" color="#339966"> I wish I could remember<br /> But my selective memory<br /> Won't let me</font><font size="2" color="#99cc00"> </font><font size="3" color="#339966"><font size="2">- </font></font><font size="1" color="#339966">Mark Oliver Everett</font></p><p> </p> </div>

 

[rogers_buck]

I predict that for the first time in human history, an ET species will first discover us. They will be filling their gas tanks from the comet when they spot our probe. They will then manuever to make contact and - BAM, get taken out by the copper bullet. This will start the first interstellar war and really screw up the data.

 

[termite]

<font color="yellow">Deep Impact Predictions</font><br /><br />It could miss!! <img src="/images/icons/wink.gif" />

 

[rogers_buck]

Life is another phase of matter. Just a higher level of organization than inanimate forms can achieve without being "tools". The universe will one day be a solid block of life at the instant it ends and a new universe is born. The entropy tensor of the new universe anchored in the order of its ancestor. But will we be ancestral or mere food?<br />- rogers_buck 7.3.12

 

[najab]

><i>You have a rich fantasy life.</i><p>And you seem not to have a sense of humour. <img src="/images/icons/tongue.gif" /></p>

 

[rogers_buck]

A wild guess - he's a sanity warrior over in the Seti forum and doesn't know when to turn it off anymore? I guess we should PM him with a heads-up before we post a joke. (-;

 

[dmjspace]

stevehw33 said: <font color="yellow"> The idea that a planet can explode has to be based upon good science, not whether or not someone's got a PhD. and published. That would be the fallacy of the appeal to authority. </font><br /><br />I see. Degrees don't matter to you now. Published papers don't matter either. Credentials are moot if you find the subject matter offensive.<br /><br />And, yet, then you argue that I have a lack of credentials, and therefore cannot be taken seriously.<br /><br />So which is it? Do credentials matter or not?<br /><br />These are the kinds of transparent pseudoscientific games pretenders such as yourself play in order to avoid having to discuss specific evidence.<br /><br />It gets really old after a while.<br /><br /><font color="yellow"> One appeals to the facts, not to someone's degree or where a few of his papers might be published. There are no cogent reasons to believe it, from either a logical or scientific standpoint. </font><br /><br />If you disagree with the facts, why not address them instead of blathering endlessly about how credentials do or do not matter, and in which cases you'll selectively accept or apply them?

 

[a_lost_packet_]

<font color="yellow">dmjspace - Prediction is the hallmark of science. The EPH predicts the Deep Impact probe will impact solid rock and vaporize, creating a small crater (no more than 30m) and a transient dust cloud. It will otherwise have no effect on the "comet." </font><br /><br />BOOM!<br /><br />BLAM!<br /><br />WHOOSH!<br /><br />What an impact!<br /><br />I would say that the EPH predictions are a little short at the moment.<br /><br />WTG DEEP IMPACT!<br /><br /> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <font size="1">I put on my robe and wizard hat...</font> </div>

 

[robnissen]

What a WONDERFUL success. I can't wait for the analysis to being.

 

[telfrow]

<font color="yellow">I would say that the EPH predictions are a little short at the moment. </font><br /><br />I would have to agree... <br /><br />WTG Deep Impact!<br /> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <strong><font color="#3366ff">Made weak by time and fate, but strong in will to strive, to seek, to find and not to yeild.</font> - <font color="#3366ff"><em>Tennyson</em></font></strong> </div>

 

[serak_the_preparer]

<i>I predict that for the first time in human history, an ET species will first discover us.</i><br /><br />Good call! This just in from Spaceflightnow:<br /><br /><i>In its final few shots, Yeomans estimated the impactor's camera was able to detect features as small as about eight inches across. The final picture was snapped just 3.7 seconds before impact.</i><br /><br />There's more:<br /><br /><i>The biggest surprise awaiting the Deep Impact mission was found among those final images. The last pictures transmitted clearly show the presence of bipedal beings entering a vehicle of some sort and sealing its hatch. There is no shortage of speculation among ecstatic JPL scientists.<br /><br />"The extraterrestrials are not very big," remarked Michael A'Hearn, "but some of them were observed in spacesuits idling around their fuel depot on Tempel 1. At least, we are guessing it is a fuel depot, though, naturally, no one is really sure at this time. They appear to be somewhere between 10 to 14 inches tall, and therefore quite small. The depot site happens to be far enough from the impact area that we do not believe they suffered any direct damage from the mission. It seems likely Deep Impact's activities had gotten their attention, which may explain their presence outside their small silvery spacecraft shortly before impact."<br /><br />By poring over previous images, mission scientists came across one deemed interesting enough to enhance further. They believe it shows the extraterrestrial space vehicle in orbit about Tempel 1 just prior to its descent to the putative depot site.<br /><br />Extraterrestrial spacecraft.jpg<br /><br />"This discovery has changed everything, of course," Yeomans said while displaying the image of the spacecraft. "And we're still going through what was sent back just before impact. Though we're in the early guesswork stages of this discovery, we already know</i>

 

[najab]

<blockquote><font class="small">In reply to:</font><hr /><p>The EPH predicts the Deep Impact probe will impact solid rock and vaporize, creating a small crater (no more than 30m) and a transient dust cloud. It will otherwise have no effect on the "comet."<p><hr /></p></p></blockquote><br /><br />The EPH is dead.