"Weird Crystals" Found in Comet Wild 2 Sample

JonClarke · Mar 12, 2006

"Telling people to ignore individuals is evasive SDC fact, so what else is new." People will always behave badly, but that does not make it acceptable. When someone refuses to answer my questions I assume that they don't have answers. When someone butts in and tells someone to ignore my questions I consider that to be extremely rude, and not something I will tolerate. "I suspect that the crystals are, in fact, composed of hydrogen, as in metallic hydrogen; when will the results be released for study?" What evidence have you for your belief, give that metallic hydrogen requires very high pressures to be stable? Generally results of studies will appear in 6-24 months, depending on the project. Jon <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> Whether we become a multi-planet species with unlimited horizons, or are forever confined to Earth will be decided in the twenty-first century amid the vast plains, rugged canyons and lofty mountains of Mars Arthur Clarke </div>

maxtheknife · Mar 12, 2006

Jon: People will always behave badly, but that does not make it acceptable. When someone refuses to answer my questions I assume that they don't have answers. When someone butts in and tells someone to ignore my questions I consider that to be extremely rude, and not something I will tolerate. Really? I'll have to remember that the next time a certain question comes up...

telfrow · Mar 12, 2006

When will the results be released for study? Preliminary findings will be discussed tomorrow (March 13) in a 3 pm press conference to be held at the Johnson Space Center in Houston. The full text of the announcement of the press conference can be found here. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> Made weak by time and fate, but strong in will to strive, to seek, to find and not to yeild. - Tennyson </div>

bonzelite · Mar 12, 2006

more thoughts on comets: comets, in the pristine model, ie, ancient objects, if true, may point to comets being intergalactic, extrasolar, wanderers. often, in edge-on views of galaxies, we are accustomed to seeing obfuscating "dust lanes." these structures are fairly common and observed with regularity. so, then, these dust lanes must be a common component of galaxies. comets are dust. that is basically what science is observing, regardless of what volatiles are present in cometary tails. therefore, an overall composite view, albeit limited to only a handfull of observed comets, is showing us that comets are composed of very super-fine materials, such as dust and ice, compacted into a freeze-dried and very porous object. what i'm getting to is that such objects as comets may originate far and beyond any one solar system. they may be borne out of the pervasive and encircling dust lanes throughout galactic structures. how they accrete is unknown, but they may form in variations upon the basic accretion theme depending on how far or near they are to a star: the longer their journey, the more dust they accumulate over vast distances. because of their wanderlusting ways, so to speak, they accrete only as very porous and loose bodies, picking up superfine dust as they go, never becoming very compacted overall. older coma may be larger, with a more compacted core. in this way, comets may indeed be pristine carriers of matter from the galaxy itself and not only the local solar system. particles, then, may be entirely foreign to this solar system's commonly found elements. comets may be regularly replenished. comets may form extrasolar-wise and then become captured by solar systems. comets may or may not form within a solar system. they could or they could not; both ways may occur, however. some comets with very long periods may have never visited the earth's sun before, and may never again, failing to enter capture of the sun and onto

bonzelite · Mar 12, 2006

People will always behave badly, but that does not make it acceptable. this statement assumes that you, too, behave badly, as you are "people." you do not exclude yourself from behaving badly, do you?

jatslo · Mar 12, 2006

Post deleted by jatslo

jatslo · Mar 12, 2006

bonzelite, " comets, in the pristine model, ie, ancient objects, if true, may point to comets being intergalactic, extrasolar, wanderers. often, in edge-on views of galaxies, we are accustomed to seeing obfuscating "dust lanes." these structures are fairly common and observed with regularity. so, then, these dust lanes must be a common component of galaxies. " "pristine model"; what pristine model? I have heard reference to a "dirty snowball", no one has quantified a hypothesis that I can either accept or reject. Seems that the lack of evidence in the "dirty snowball" idea pretty much negates that idea. Of course, that negated "Dirty Snowball" is rippling through the cosmos as we speak, and reeking havoc on other ideas that are derivative on the "Dirty Snowball" idea. I say "Dirty Snowball" idea, because I have not seen anything more than speculation and conjecture in the regard. I have, on the other hand, seen evidence that support other ideas. "comets are dust. that is basically what science is observing, regardless of what volatiles are present in cometary tails. therefore, an overall composite view, albeit limited to only a handfull of observed comets, is showing us that comets are composed of very super-fine materials, such as dust and ice, compacted into a freeze-dried and very porous object." One of my favorite ideas involve exploding planets. For example, evidence in support of this idea would involve meta stable metallic hydrogen, in which I suspect that metallic hydrogen is more like a diamond than metal, and virtually indestructible, to boot. We all know that metallic hydrogen requires cryogenic temperatures first, and then extreme pressures second; pressures that can only be sustained within the planet core, or further out, which depends on the mass of the planet in question. So if metallic hydrogen, in fact, turns out the mysterious crystals, then we would know that a m

bonzelite · Mar 12, 2006

you're suggesting coma to be debris from destroyed larger bodies, perhaps worlds. sure. that could be possible. the metallic hydrogen idea is compelling. i will look more into it's characteristics and speak to that later. it'd be cool if they discovered the crystals to be of this origin. i would bet, as you suggest, vast regions of undetected matter, in clouds as dust and debris, existing in the outer reaches of the solar system. the galaxy itself, and thus the solar systems within it, are replete with massive volumes of such dust and ionized matter. comets seem bretheren to these regions. i will be curious as to how the latest findings are phrased and presented. i will be paying close attention to the semantics of the disclosures as well as what they withold. there will be subtextual meaning, in other words. i will guarantee that.

jatslo · Mar 12, 2006

Hopfully we have something more discuss that is other than a news story. I for one would like to see the primary evidence. Like spectro analysis of the crystal in question. I am also interested in the electrical properties, as well. Is this a new product, based on familar elements? Wouldn't that be interesting, if the crystal in question withstood tempertures, thus preventing us from breaking down its chemical bond?

TheShadow · Mar 12, 2006

jastlo says: I sense debate in your tone, Duh! This is a forum for debate. jastlo says: so tone it down or face the consequences of your actions If that is an invitation to debate, it is superfluous. As pointed out, this is a forum. If that is a threat that you will misbehave, be warned it will not be tolerated. When JonClarke referred to your refusal to answer questions, he was reminding you of one of the rules of debate on this Science forum. If someone poses a valid question in the debate, you are required to give a responsive and relevant answer, or admit you were in error. jastlo says: Do you have a personal bias against Maxtheknife Statements like that are inflammatory and non-topical. They do NOT belong in debates on these forums. They are not only ad hominem, they are libelous in nature. I will say this once. This it is NOT an invitation to debate, here in this thread, the issue of proper debating tactics. If you wish to debate the issue, do so in PM or in Suggestions Forum. jastlo says: Last time you started asking me for evidence you deleted it, and denied that you did, in a cover-up. You have made such accusations before. This is the last time you will make such accusations on these Science Forums. There is no basis for the accusation. If you wish to discuss such issues, use the proper forum. Further violations will earn you a vacation. Once again, do NOT discuss this here. End of subject. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> Who knows what evil lurks in the hearts of men, the Shadow knows. </div>

TheShadow · Mar 12, 2006

jastlo says: I sense debate in your tone, Duh! This is a forum for debate. jastlo says: so tone it down or face the consequences of your actions If that is an invitation to debate, it is superfluous. As pointed out, this is a forum. If that is a threat that you will misbehave, be warned it will not be tolerated. When JonClarke referred to your refusal to answer questions, he was reminding you of one of the rules of debate on this Science forum. If someone poses a valid question in the debate, you are required to give a responsive and relevant answer, or admit you were in error. jastlo says: Do you have a personal bias against Maxtheknife Statements like that are inflammatory and non-topical. They do NOT belong in debates on these forums. They are not only ad hominem, they are libelous in nature. I will say this once. This it is NOT an invitation to debate, here in this thread, the issue of proper debating tactics. If you wish to debate the issue, do so in PM or in Suggestions Forum. jastlo claims: Last time you started asking me for evidence you deleted it, and denied that you did, in a cover-up. You have made such accusations before. This is the last time you will make such accusations on these Science Forums. There is no basis for the accusation. If you wish to discuss such issues, use the proper forum. Further violations will earn you a vacation. Once again, do NOT discuss this here. End of subject. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> Who knows what evil lurks in the hearts of men, the Shadow knows. </div>

jatslo · Mar 12, 2006

**Off-topic post deleted**

CalliArcale · Mar 12, 2006

<blockquote>In reply to:<hr />Like spectro analysis of the crystal in question. I am also interested in the electrical properties, as well. Is this a new product, based on familar elements? Wouldn't that be interesting, if the crystal in question withstood tempertures, thus preventing us from breaking down its chemical bond?<hr /></blockquote> What do you mean, "withstood temperatures"? High temps? Low? Obviously it must withstand some temps, or it would not exist. <img src="/images/icons/wink.gif" /> (Sorry, I couldn't resist.) Or are you suggesting it withstands all temperatures? That would suggest an exotic substance that defies chemistry and subatomic physics. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> "People assume that time is a strict progression of cause to effect, but actually from a non-linear, non-subjective viewpoint it's more like a big ball of wibbly wobbly . . . timey wimey . . . stuff." -- The Tenth Doctor, "Blink" </div>

jatslo · Mar 12, 2006

Yes, all temperatures; not being able to break it down to analyze element composition; indestructible.

JonClarke · Mar 12, 2006

"Really? I'll have to remember that the next time a certain question comes up... " And what question might that be Max? I the best of my knowledge I have never avoided any serious question from anyone. I might have missed a few in the rush, but that is a different story. Jon <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> Whether we become a multi-planet species with unlimited horizons, or are forever confined to Earth will be decided in the twenty-first century amid the vast plains, rugged canyons and lofty mountains of Mars Arthur Clarke </div>

JonClarke · Mar 12, 2006

"this statement assumes that you, too, behave badly, as you are "people." you do not exclude yourself from behaving badly, do you?" I most certainly do not. I am as fallible and flawed as the next person. if I do behave badly, raise it with me, preferably publically, and I will apologise. If my response does not give you satisfaction, raise it with the moderators, if they don't deal with it, the administrators. Jon <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> Whether we become a multi-planet species with unlimited horizons, or are forever confined to Earth will be decided in the twenty-first century amid the vast plains, rugged canyons and lofty mountains of Mars Arthur Clarke </div>

JonClarke · Mar 12, 2006

I have asked you to supply evidence for your statement that these crysals are metallic hydrogen. Why should I tone down simple questions? I certainly do not want or expect you to be intimidated by them, I only want you to explain your reasons. We have had useful discussions in the past, why should it change now? Conjecture is fine, but it should have some kind of factual constraints. Even though the crystal composition is unknown, there are somethings that can be ruled out very quickly. Methane or nitrogen crystals are one - it's too hot. Metallic hydrogen is another - you need pressures like the interior of Jupiter to get it. My conjecture is that they turn out to be silicate crystals. this is consistent with what we know about comets from astronomical observations and other space probes. Jon <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> Whether we become a multi-planet species with unlimited horizons, or are forever confined to Earth will be decided in the twenty-first century amid the vast plains, rugged canyons and lofty mountains of Mars Arthur Clarke </div>

jatslo · Mar 12, 2006

Let's just shake hands, and be nice to one another then. I am not asking you to accept thought; I am asking you to entertain thought without accepting it, if you can. Metallic Hydrogen is something that we would expect to see with a Jupiter sized planet, and we are not even sure if metallic hydrogen can exist outside of the extreme pressures it takes to create it. Metallic hydrogen is not a fairy-tale like fire breathing dragons; it is real, and has been tested in a lab. Metallic hydrogen behaves similarly to diamonds, with respect to spectra, in which it peaks at opaque. If metallic hydrogen exists in the universe, then why would it not transmute into crystal, for example, and if these crystals are, in fact, out there, then why would we not detect those odd crystals in the tale of a comet when a comet could be a piece of a planet? It is just an idea, JonClarke; conjecture; speculation, and I can't prove it. However, tomorrow we will know. telfrow said results are due to be released. tomorrow we will know, and if I am wrong, I will gladly admit it. There are a lot of ideas about the subject, but only one of them can be right, and I red in this thread that you are more inclined to accept a less exotic source, and maybe you are right, but you might be wrong too, so are you willing to admit that when the time comes?

maxtheknife · Mar 12, 2006

Shadow: Duh! This is a forum for debate. Could've fooled me <img src="/images/icons/laugh.gif" />

Saiph · Mar 12, 2006

<blockquote>In reply to:<hr />Metallic hydrogen is not a fairy-tale like fire breathing dragons; it is real, and has been tested in a lab. Metallic hydrogen behaves similarly to diamonds, with respect to spectra, in which it peaks at opaque. If metallic hydrogen exists in the universe, then why would it not transmute into crystal, for example, and if these crystals are, in fact, out there, then why would we not detect those odd crystals in the tale of a comet when a comet could be a piece of a planet? <hr /></blockquote> Yeah, it's been tested in labs. And found that if high pressure is not maintained...the stuff turns back into regular ole' gaseous hydrogen. Since the tail of a commet is not a high pressure region...the hydrogen there shouldn't be "metallic". As for your statement that the spectra peaks at opaque....ummm huh? If you mean it's opaque to visible wavelengths...ok. But when you put it that way it doesn't make sense. spectra peak at wavelengths of light, not at...opaque. If metallic hydrogen exists...it may not transmute into a crystal because it may not have the correct properties to do so. I don't know enough about it to say if it can, or can't be a crystal. But I doubt it as I've never heard anything about hydrogen, or helium, being able to have a solid state. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> --------------------SaiphMOD@gmail.com -------------------"This is my Timey Wimey Detector. Goes "bing" when there's stuff. It also fries eggs at 30 paces, wether you want it to or not actually. I've learned to stay away from hens: It's not pretty when they blow" -- The Tenth Doctor, "Blink" </div>

jatslo · Mar 12, 2006

I thought Helium II is the one that does not have a solid state, but the others turn solid at specific temps. Right about the spectra; I just remember that it turned opaque at 320, or something like that ...And metallic hydrogen will not remain metallic outside of pressure, but just because we are unsuccessful, does not mean that it is not possible in nature. For example, if you could hold that pressure and cool the metal at the same time or cool it over a period of time, then the metallic hydrogen might bond into crystal. Anyway, we have less than 24-hours to wait for results.

yevaud · Mar 12, 2006

bonzelite 03/12/06 10:21 AM There is a reason I am at first seemingly going off-topic here. Please read on. more thoughts on comets: comets, in the pristine model, ie, ancient objects, if true, may point to comets being intergalactic, extrasolar, wanderers. often, in edge-on views of galaxies, we are accustomed to seeing obfuscating "dust lanes." these structures are fairly common and observed with regularity. so, then, these dust lanes must be a common component of galaxies. Ever wonder why Astronomers are so damned certain why Comets (in the aggregate) are comprised in the "Dirty Snowball" model? Bonzelite: Comets are dust. that is basically what science is observing, regardless of what volatiles are present in cometary tails. Me: This is incorrect. As you move outwards in the Solar System, the proportion of Rocky/mineral planetary masses versus volatile masses begins to reverse. From Jupiter outwards is the gretest proportion of the Solar System's mass (discounting Sol, of course). And this is in the forms of volatiles, organics and so on. This is an observational fact. Further: Amounts of the Solar System's non-volatile mass in the form of dust may well exist, but nowhere in the amounts you believe. The bulk of this dust that was present originally was created early on in solar history, and so has a very long period of time in which to accrete into a larger body, be attracted to another, larger body, or blown outwards in the Solar wind. That phase of Solar development is long gone. We detect vast amounts of said volatiles in the outer Solar System: Ammonia, Nitrogen, Hydrogen, Methane, ethanes, etc. - and yes, H, O, and H20 - where the bulk of the mass of the Solar System is. You think it's a fair bet that the bulk of Cometary material originating from the Kuiper Belt and Oort cloud (and from the <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> Differential Diagnosis: "I am both amused and annoyed that you think I should be less stubborn than you are." </div>

bonzelite · Mar 12, 2006

the stratification, if you will, from terrestrial/rocky planets in the inner solar system, out past the asteroid belt to jupiter and the outer gas giants, with their icy moons, is not unknown to me, certainly. it's pretty clear a trend. and my schtick here is that comets may not be predicated upon this trend whatsoever. i'm throwing out a hypothesis that they may be extrasolar in origin, if not wholly, then partly. regions of comet birth may not be in any way known. regions of the solar system may render unaccreted matter or anomalous ionized particles that are heretofore unknown. i am saying that there may be stuff that "should not be there," to use a common and trite press release protectionary phrase. commonly known core accretion theory is already disproven as there are extrasolar gas supergiants orbiting their primary star at a distance so close to the star that the planet is nearly touching the sun's surface. so that immediately disqualifies the orderly fashion of rocky-to-gaseous-volatile as a linear axiom of development. our solar system is not the template. volatile bodies can exist near the sun, with terrestrial bodies residing farther out. and comets may indicate that terrestrial matter can exist far beyond what is assumed to be possible. indeed, comets possess a volatile component. that is undeniable and proven. likewise, comets may not follow a coherent or neat and tidy scheme of development under the assumptions that exclude distant terrestrial bodies. especially when what is largely observed of them thus far are quasi-asteroidal nuclei with a percentage of volatiles that stream off the coma when impinged upon by the solar plasma. i know you are loathe to let go of your snow-cone frosty the snowman imagery of comets. time will tell as more comets are sampled and studied. if they end up as snowcones, as you feel they are, i will shave my head and buy you a pint of your favorite beer

spacechump · Mar 13, 2006

I thought Helium II is the one that does not have a solid state, but the others turn solid at specific temps. No helium needs to be under great pressure to turn into a solid regardless of the temperature. From Wikipedia: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Helium#Solid_and_liquid_phases Helium solidifies only under great pressure. The resulting colorless almost invisible solid is highly compressible; applying pressure in the laboratory can decrease its volume by more than 30%. With a bulk modulus on the order of 5×107 Pa [1] it is 50 times more compressible than water. Unlike any other element, helium will fail to solidify and remain a liquid down to absolute zero at normal pressures. Solid helium requires a temperature of 1–1.5 K and about 26 standard atmospheres (2.6 MPa) of pressure. It is often hard to distinguish solid from liquid helium since the refractive index of the two phases are nearly the same. The solid has a sharp melting point and has a crystalline structure. As for metallic hydrogen: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metallic_hydrogen It may be possible to produce substantial quantities of metallic hydrogen, with practical benefit. The existence has been theorized of a form (called 'Metastable Metallic Hydrogen', abbreviated MSMH) that would not revert to ordinary hydrogen upon release of pressure, just as diamonds freed from the compression of the underground do not revert to ordinary graphite. In addition, it would make an efficient fuel itself (and a clean one, with only water as an end product); 9 times as dense as standard hydrogen, it would give off considerable energy when reverting to that form. "Burned" more quickly, it could be a propellant with five times the efficiency of liquid H2/O2, the current spac

JonClarke · Mar 13, 2006

I would be happy to "shake hands", provided you retract your claim that I have deliberately falsified the record of this forum. As I have said before, I have not done this. Regardless of whether you retract or not I do my best to treat you with the same courtesy I try and give to everyone else where. As for metallic hydrogen, yes, it does exist, but as far as we know it needs pressures of well over 1 million atmsopheres to form. As far as we know the moment the pressure is released the metallic hydrogen will revert to a non-metallic form. Yes, people have speculated that metastable forms may exist at lower pressures, but they have not evidence and I believe their logic flawed. So even if comets are planetary fragments I would not expect to find metallic hydrogen. And I know of no evidence with supports the fact they are such fragments. But that is another story. As for being wrong, I have suggested that these crystals are silicates. If I am wrong then I will certainly admit it. Jon <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> Whether we become a multi-planet species with unlimited horizons, or are forever confined to Earth will be decided in the twenty-first century amid the vast plains, rugged canyons and lofty mountains of Mars Arthur Clarke </div>

"Weird Crystals" Found in Comet Wild 2 Sample

JonClarke

Guest

maxtheknife

Guest

telfrow

Guest

bonzelite

Guest

bonzelite

Guest

jatslo

Guest

jatslo

Guest

bonzelite

Guest

jatslo

Guest

TheShadow

Guest

TheShadow

Guest

jatslo

Guest

CalliArcale

Guest

jatslo

Guest

JonClarke

Guest

JonClarke

Guest

JonClarke

Guest

jatslo

Guest

maxtheknife

Guest

Saiph

Guest

jatslo

Guest

yevaud

Guest

bonzelite

Guest

spacechump

Guest

JonClarke

Guest

Similar threads

TRENDING THREADS

Latest posts

Share this page