![]() |
![]() |
#9 | ||
.
Join Date: Aug 2013
Posts: 8,898
Battle Record: 27-22
Rep Power: 85899399 ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
![]()
Well, most of his theories revolve around an idea that the sun's solar wind is positively charged particles... he believes this because the sun emits large streamers of positively charged particles into space
But this just means it is ionized. There are loads (loads) of experiments done on the solar wind in space that show that it is ionized, not charged. If the sun emits positive charge, a negative charge would have to collect on its surface... this negative charge on the surface would result in a completely different model for the sun's magnetic field and the movement on the sun's surface that we see/ measure with different imaging techniques etc. Quote:
....essentially, McCanney hangs onto this assumption because it is the basis for the rest of his work- disproving the snowy dustball comet model or w/e Quote:
the dynamics of the tail formation rely on the comet passing through a charged medium, which space is not... he's clinging to a variation on the "aether" model of space, most likely due to bitterness from being discredited by his former peers at Cornell... I actually feel for the guy. anyways, on top of all that, he has some really outrageously dumb views on comet size/ gaining mass that only exist to create symmetry in his web of inaccuracy. like, he believes that comets gain mass by collecting dust as they travel through space at 30-45 km/s and that they are incrementally growing all the time. but when you have a collision, there is energy transfer. the number of collisions grows exponentially as the comet grows due to increased surface area this means HUUUUUUUUGE amounts of energy are being transferred into the comet and he still believes that the comet is growing indefinitely during all this well, if you work out the math, the comet would essentially have to be absorbing energy equal to 2,500 TRILLION NAGASAKI BOMBS EXPLODING ON ITS SURFACE EVERY SINGLE SECOND Okay. Now, let us assume that Nbiru is the size of our moon. it is hurtling Chyeahhh. hurtling. towards the earth. this object being, as McCanney describes it, a hot, dense mass of rock, has a certain gravitational binding energy. Or an energy that must be overcome to tear it apart. So, using numbers from before, the energy required to vaporize a comet of the Moon's mass would be about 10^36ergs, or one-hundredth the heat released by the impacts. The heat caused by McCanney's "mass gain" is actually enough to destroy the comet itself. it's a huge house of cards, Chyeahhhh
__________________
http://split8.yolasite.com |
||
![]() |
![]() |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|