CHONDRITIC METEORITES

Chondrules Resource

This paper is just for Reference.

universetoday.com/tag/chondrites … meteorite.com/chondrules-galore

Bing A.I. on Chondrules & Tektites ... One way to compare the composition of chondrules and tektites is to look at their mineralogy, water content, and isotopic signatures. Chondrules are round grains found in chondrites, which are stony meteorites that represent some of the oldest solid materials in the solar system. Chondrules are mostly composed of silicate minerals such as olivine and pyroxene, with small amounts of other minerals such as sulfides, metallic Fe-Ni, oxides, and phosphates. Chondrules have very low water content (<0.02 wt%) and show a chemical relation to the local bedrock or sediments where they formed. Tektites are gravel-sized bodies of natural glass formed from terrestrial debris ejected during meteorite impacts. Tektites are also high in silica (>65 wt%), but have a bulk chemical and isotopic composition closer to those of shales and similar sedimentary rocks. Tektites also have very low water content (<0.02 wt%) and contain lechatelierite, a high-temperature silica glass that is not found in chondrules. Tektites can be classified into different groups based on their morphology and physical characteristics, such as splash-form, aerodynamically shaped, and layered tektites.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
CHONDRULES SEARCH at https://www.catastrophism.com/intro/search.cgi?zoom_query=chondrule&zoom_per_page=25&zoom_and=1&zoom_cat=-1
Formation of Chondritic Meteorites and the Solar System [SIS Review] ... also presented at the 13th National Australian Convention of Amateur Astronomers in Sydney during Easter 1988. It is the thunderbolt that steers the Universe' - Heraclitus, c.500 BC Introduction This paper examines some of the puzzling features of the largest class of meteorites, the stony chondritic meteorites, or chondrites. Chondrites are so named because they contain chondrules or small spherules of olivine, enstatite or another of the meteoritic materials. The chondrules are embedded in a matrix of similar material. A new theory of chondrite genesis is outlined here and an experiment proposed which may test its most important aspects. The implications of this theory for the formation of the Solar System is discussed, and also ...

The science of meteoritics: Stones of Heaven [Book] ... (b ) Aerolithes, which are non-metallic bodies, known as `stones', and containing only traces of metals. They have often the same general composition as terrestrial volcanic rocks, although their texture may differentiate them from the latter. Aerolithes are divided into: Chondrites, or stones containing spherical or irregular grain-like bodies of variable size (chondrules). Achondrites, or stones which do not contain chondrules. This makes their identification as meteorites far more difficult, as they are easily confused with terrestrial rocks. (c ) Siderolithes, or stones containing large metallic inclusions (mainly iron-nickel). Siderites and siderolithes are easily recognizable by their high magnetism and the characteristic pattern the metallic ...

News from the Internet [SIS Workshop] ... discharges in protoplanetary systems http://arxiv.org/abs/astro-ph/0502010 Authors: B. McBreen, E. Winston, S. McBreen, L. Hanlon. Journal-ref: Astron. Astrophys. 429 (2005) L41. Lightning in the solar nebula is considered to be one of the probable sources for producing the chondrules that are found in meteorites. Gamma-ray bursts (GRBs) provide a large flux of gamma-rays that Compton scatter and create a charge separation in the gas because the electrons are displaced from the positive ions. The electric field easily exceeds the breakdown value of ~1 V m^ -1 over distances of order 0.1 AU. ...

Monitor [SIS Workshop] ... main impact which generated a brilliant meteor, succeeded by a rising fireball of hot gases jetting out to 3,000 km above the planet's cloud tops. The main bright event was caused by flashes of infrared energy as the collapsing plume became compressed. Dark clouds formed later. ELECTROMAGNETISM Electricity in space In Lunar and Planetary Inst. Conference on chondrules and the protoplanetary disk, pp. 13-14 Primitive meteorites contain chondrules, tiny glassy drops which appear to be products of intense heating events. A leading candidate for the cause of these events is now suggested as electrostatic discharges. Our magnetic Sun New Scientist 29.7.95, p. 14 and 17.6.95, ...

Monitor [SIS Review] ... clumping together in a disc of dust and gas surrounding the young Sun is under fire. Instead, did the Sun violently spew out jets of charged particles from its poles? These would have had strong magnetic fields of their own, forming a wind' which blew material far and wide. This would explain the presence of melted blobs called chondrules in meteorites. They could not have been melted in the cold depths of space, whereas their strong magnetism suggests they solidified in powerful magnetic fields. Electric Spin (Science Frontier, no. 148, Jul. -Aug. 2003, p. 4) Metal spheres suspended on wires began to spin when a D.C . ...

Monitor [SIS Workshop] ... 13 The hydrogen gas in our region of the Galaxy is apparently ionised, not so much by the 3 million stars near it, but by the influence of a single very distant star. Geologists have recognised the influence of giant bolts of lightning or magnetic flares' in the Solar System as they have shown that dark, fluffy inclusions in chondrules in meteorites were probably formed by intense electromagnetic discharges. Astrophysicists are now having trouble with their dynamo' theory which they dreamed up to explain the magnetic fields which all rotating bodies and systems in the Universe appear to have, from planets and stars to whole galaxies. Detailed examination shows that the theory just will not work for the Sun ...
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
PLANETS, STARS, AND PLASMA PHYSICS By Wallace Thornhill
https://saturniancosmology.org/othergroup/thoth/thoth01.txt
VOL I, No. 1 - January 25, 1997
Hello everyone from DownUnder!
Dave has asked me to give a summary of my interest and position in the debate about the Saturnian configuration. I was one of the early science undergraduates, in the late 50's, who had read Velikovsky's works before entering University. In my naiveté, I thought that no questions were taboo in the halls of academe. To my surprise and profound disillusionment with "experts", I soon discovered that this was not so. I then began to do what Dave has done and looked for further evidence, working on my own. So far as I know, I was the only science undergraduate who haunted the anthropology section of the library bookshelves. It was enough to convince me that there was a major case to be explored for a "recent" re- arrangement of the solar system.
I did not pursue the mytho-historical threads, since my first love is astronomy. But I have applied the same principles in that field that Dave has done in his work--that is, pattern recognition and matching. The results have been very encouraging and interesting.
I should state my prejudices concerning the present state of science. I would characterize the scientific age as being the age of homo sapiens ignoramus. To be specific about our ignorance in the areas most likely to affect the Saturnian configuration, I would list the following:
GRAVITY - Einstein, with his geometric DESCRIPTION of gravity has held back understanding by the better part of a century. The most promising work in EXPLAINING gravity is being done by a handful of Classical Physicists who see it as a minute imbalance in electrostatic forces associated with fundamental particles. The recent announcement of the accidental discovery of gravitational shielding by a rotating superconductor seems congruent with the classical approach. It certainly could not be predicted from the current metaphysics of gravity theory.
ELECTRICAL DISCHARGES - This is crucial. We do not understand what causes earthly lightning so we are unlikely to acknowledge plasma discharges in space. The little plasma physics that astronomers are taught is flawed: that plasmas are electrically neutral and superconducting (they trap magnetic fields). So apart from gravity, magnetism is the only other force we hear about. We are told that energetic events on the Sun are due to "magnetic reconnection" (whatever that means). The strongest force (barring nuclear)--electrical--is never mentioned. We find it easy on Earth to generate x-rays using electric discharges, but astronomers insist on Nature doing it the hard way in space. It is also not generally known that electrical discharges are very efficient at removing material against gravity and dumping it into space or onto another nearby object.
STARS - We do not understand what makes them tick. As Ralph Juergens said in the 70's, practically every feature of our Sun has no business being there if it is purely a thermonuclear engine radiating into space. Magnetic fields do not occur without an associated electric current. The Sun is essentially an extended, conducting plasma subject to electric stress. The phenomenon we call the Sun is purely a ball of lightning. That the Earth and other planets intercept some of the galactic plasma discharge is shown by the recent discovery of diffuse stratospheric discharges (sprites), x-rays and gamma-rays above earthly storms. This is a precise analogue of the corona (x-rays), chromospheric glow discharge and photospheric lightning (granulations are the tops of the discharges) on the Sun. The umbra of a sunspot gives us a glimpse of the true temperature of the body of the Sun.
As a result of this realization, it follows that the conventional stellar evolutionary story is pure fiction. Stars are what they are because of their environment. Their variability is caused by their environment, not their internal workings. This explains the speed with which some stars change their characteristics. Heavy elements are not built up solely in supernovae, but at the surface of all stars in the non-thermal compression and acceleration of plasma discharges (granulations). Hence, nucleosynthesis and what little neutrino production there is fall as the sunspot number increases. The differential rotation of the Sun, its magnetic field and the sunspot cycle are all influenced by the Sun's passage across large Birkeland currents flowing along, and defining the arms of our galaxy.
PLANET FORMATION - The Laplacian theory and its variants are garbage. The Hubble Space Telescope has shown that in regions of star formation large bodies are being shot out as if from a gun, which is peculiar if gravity is the operative force.
Once again plasma discharges provide a mechanism which can simply explain this. The view is that diffuse hydrogen and dust is efficiently scavenged and compressed by the well known magnetic pinch effect of an electric current flowing along the arms of a galaxy. At some point gravity takes over and stellar objects are formed. Beyond a certain size proto stars become electrically unstable and "fission", spitting out some of the core and giving rise to one or more companions. This explains the predilection for stars to be found in pairs or multiples. Not all of the matter ejected from the core of a proto-star may coalesce into a companion star. It may be in the form of one or a number of gas giants. (The recent discovery of a Jupiter-like body orbiting very close to a nearby star argues strongly for this model and against the standard theory). A gas giant, in turn, due to either internal or external electrical disturbance may fission, spitting out its core, to give rise to the highly condensed planets, moons, asteroids, comets etc.
COSMOLOGY - All of the above gives rise to the conviction that cosmology should be in the hands of the plasma physics experimenters (not the theorists). It is ironic that they have been chasing the holy grail of fusion power "just like the Sun", when that is patently wrong. (Interestingly, a recent breakthrough in fusion energy research came about in my home town, Canberra, when the researchers configured their plasma discharge in the form of a Birkeland current ring - a precise analogue of that flowing along the arms of our galaxy).
But astronomers will continue to be surprised by results pouring in from space probes when their fundamental paradigms rest on Newtonian and billiard-ball physics. The current paradigm has no predictive power whatsoever. The book "The Big Bang Never Happened" by Eric J Lerner is a pointer to the cosmology of the 21st century.
-----
So, what are the patterns that apply from all this to the Saturnian Configuration (SC)? The following are some ideas:
1 - the core discharge mechanism of planet formation is a plausible way to generate the SC, a string of objects with the largest near the middle.
2 - the reliance on the degree of electric stress in the enveloping plasma for the characteristics of the larger bodies enclosed in that plasma could see rapid changes occur, even the disruption of one of the stellar or gas giant objects. It could certainly involve jets of material being emitted by such bodies and forming a diffuse cloud enveloping the SC. It could also be the destabilising influence which finally breaks it up.
3 - As seen in the high speed objects shooting out of the Orion Nebula, plasma discharges taking place in the core of a star or gas giant can result in considerable acceleration of the resultant debris. This may provide some of the source of the energy required to position Jupiter and Saturn much farther out in our solar system. The redistribution of charge amongst objects in a solar radial field also REQUIRES that their orbits will change.
4 - Charged bodies orbiting eccentrically in a radial electric field around the Sun will dissipate energy through electromagnetic induction heating in such a way as to quickly spiral into a circular orbit. For any object with a high eccentricity, electrical breakdown will occur within its Langmuir sheath and cometary discharge phenomena will be seen, regardless of its size (Venus?).
5 - If gravity is essentially an electrostatic phenomenon, the unusual environment of the Saturnian configuration would be expected to have caused a difference in the perceived gravity at the surface of the Earth. It is conceivable that the electric stress within the plasma sheath enclosing the SC was less than that which the Earth endures in its current solar environment. This would result in an effective lower gravity. The breakup of the SC would have caused a sudden change. An interesting sidelight to this idea is that the apparent very low density of Saturn may be due to the use of a UNIVERSAL Gravitational constant in the determination. There may be no such thing! (Measurements of G in laboratories on Earth don't seem to agree). In Saturn's electrical environment we may have shared an apparent low gravity.
6 - Various odd phenomena associated with plasma discharges would have been observed from Earth and should appear in ancient depictions of the SC. These include helical, serpentine glows surrounding a central column or twined rope-like around each other. These would be representations of Birkeland currents flowing between planets enveloped in the same plasma sheath. The number of "strands" may have varied and given rise to the depictions of Venus with different numbers of radiants. We should also look at photographs from deep space of "exploding stars" for clues to the imagery since they are electric discharge phenomena writ large. One example is where we see bright rings at the bases of cones. From below, they would possibly look like rings around the column or a series of flared skirts. Another effect is seen in discharge tubes filled with low pressure gas where a series of light and dark bands are formed transverse to the discharge axis. This might give rise to a kind of "stairway to heaven" or ziggurat appearance. Then there is the self-contained plasmoid, a corkscrew within an overall football shape which forms the interplanetary equivalent of lightning and appears to have been depicted as Zeus' thunderbolt.
-----
I have looked in some detail at chondritic meteorites which I expect to be left-overs from a planetary discharge event. They show all the characteristics to be expected of material that has been subjected to flash heating, acceleration, collision and ion implantation in a spatially restricted compressed gas stream together with isotopic modification by enhanced radiation, followed by sudden cooling - all the symptoms of a plasma discharge. I predicted that the features of the enigmatic chondrule shells could be reproduced in the lab in a plasma oven.
(A planetary discharge is a very effective way for Martian meteorites to have been created).
Very strong evidence for planetary electrical scarring comes from the Magellan Orbiter images of Venus. Also, the Jovian moon, Europa was presumably a part of the SC and would also have been subject to electrical scarring. I predict that when closeups of Europa are available in December, the so-called cracks in the ice will be found to be electric discharge channels with the raised levees on either side and the dark-light-dark cross section caused by discharge modification of the excavated material. (In the manner of the green glass beads formed from the melted soil excavated by an electric discharge along the lunar rilles). The "cracks" on Europa show no lateral displacement where they intersect, though displacement would be expected if they were due to shifting ice. Discharge channels will throw material from the younger channel into the older where they intersect. Cracks should not show this characteristic.
After that I need a long, cold Fosters!
Wal Thornhill
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
FORMATION OF CHONDRITIC METEORITES
https://saturniancosmology.org/othergroup/thoth/thoth19.txt
VOL I, No. 19 - July 16, 1997
Wal Thornhill (walt at netinfo.com.au)
'It is the thunderbolt that steers the Universe' - Heraclitus, c.500 BC
Meteorites are important in the scheme of things because they are thought to be the Rosetta stones of the formation of the solar system. I don't believe that. Rather, I think they are a snapshot taken during the more catastrophic phases of the recent development of the solar system. In 1987 I published a paper which examined some of the puzzling features of the largest class of meteorites, the stony chondritic meteorites, or chondrites. Chondrites are so named because they contain chondrules or small spherules of olivine, enstatite or another of the meteoritic materials. The chondrules are embedded in a matrix of similar material.
Current theories of their formation see them as products of the condensation of the solar nebula, very early in the history of the Solar System. Their irregular form, different sizes and evidently complex history create many problems for the nebular hypothesis. However, despite their wide range of composition and structure, there are regularities that suggest a common origin.
PECULIAR FEATURES OF CHONDRITES
The following puzzles must be answered by any theory of chondrite formation:
1. There are 4 identified concentric zones within the asteroid belt which yield 4 distinct types of chondritic meteorite. Each type has few, if any, components that are identical to those in other types.
2. Chondrites contain high melting-point inclusions (calcium- and aluminium-rich inclusions, or CAI's) which characteristically have thin shells or rims surrounding them.
3. All refractory components appear to have suffered some 'flash' heating event of unknown origin and consequently show a complex and 'unearthly' chemistry and morphology.
4. The high and low temperature components of chondrites are well mixed, generally as separate entities. They have not grown from a refractory core outwards to a less refractory rim. The chemistry of the components is complementary and must have originated in a closed system.
5. The thickness of the CAI shells does not seem to vary much from one inclusion in a specimen to another.
6. Despite the often complex shape of the inclusions, the shells follow the surface faithfully with little variation in thickness.
7. The rare earth 'signature' of the CAI shells indicates that they have been formed from the body of the inclusion rather than being deposited from some external source.
8. The CAI shell is enriched up to 5 times in the refractory rare earths and have a europium/ytterbium (Eu/Yb) anomaly which indicates that the inclusions have been strongly heated and 80% of the surface layer sublimed away.
9. The heating was brief, <100 sec, as evidenced by the sharp inner edge to the CAI shells and the fact that CAI cores are largely unaffected by the heat pulse. The retention of volatiles in chondrules also indicates that the heating was of very short duration, measured in seconds. Therefore the zone of formation must have been highly localised. It could not have taken place in an extensive solar nebula.
10. The growth of the refractory components (CAI's) was interrupted while they were still at high temperature.
11. The temperature required to give the observed Eu/Yb anomaly in the CAI shells is 1500 degrees Centigrade, or more.
12. Since the most refractory components are found in the most distant chondrites from the Sun, solar radiation was evidently not the source of heat for their formation.
13. The cooling period must be measured in minutes or hours. It should also be noted that the chondrules, which are glassy drops of silicate, show evidence of rapid chilling. Strangely, they are almost all non-spherical.
14. The inclusions are surrounded by a halo of very fine grained matrix material for several millimetres, then the chondrules and coarser, more volatile components that enclose that halo.
15. The core of the inclusion has an excess of heavy magnesium (Mg) isotopes, while the shell has normal Mg isotope ratios.
16. Many chondrules contain relict grains, indicating that they are not formed by condensation. Grains larger than 0.2mm are inconsistent with formation from interstellar dust which is believed to have a very small percentage of grains of such size.
17. The existence of compound chondrules is evidence for collisions between molten chondrules. Also some grains may have been incorporated into fully or partially molten chondrules by collision.
I wrote at the time: "Currently there is no single theory that can account for these observations." Nothing has changed since my explanation in 1987 for the formation of meteorites, which was based on Eric Crew's theory of ejection of material from a planet by an intense electrical discharge (for example, on a small scale, the recently formed giant Valles Marineris canyon on Mars which removed 2 million cubic kilometers of its surface. It is not surprising therefore that we should find Martian meteorites on Earth).
The arc of material leaving the parent body would be composed of ionised gases, liquids and solids ranging in size from microns up to asteroid or planetoid dimensions. Electric discharges would take place between the parent planet and the highly charged departing matter. These powerful plasma discharges would give rise to a number of effects, as follows.
EXPECTED FEATURES DUE TO ELECTRIC DISCHARGE PHENOMENA
1. Heating would be most intense along the axis of the discharge, falling off with radial distance from the axis.
This might explain some of the chemical differences between CAI's by varying degrees of vaporisation of precursor solids. Such differential heating would have the more refractory type A CAI's condensing and cooling last along the hot discharge axis and having inclusions of less refractory type B CAI's, which formed at lower temperatures and cooled earlier, further from the axis. The magnetic 'pinch' effect of the discharge would accelerate the type B CAI's radially inwards and thus cause implantation by collision of type B CAI's within type A, as has been discovered. The converse has not been seen.
2. At some distance from the discharge axis low melting point minerals would melt to form chondrules, trapping grains or partially melted solids. The consensus is that chondrules are formed by melting of preexisting solids.
3. Refractory particles would have their exterior surfaces evenly 'flash-heated' to temperatures of the order of thousands of degrees Celsius for the short period of the discharge, probably measured in seconds or minutes.
4. Volatile elements would be preferentially vaporised in the discharge channel and accelerated along the discharge axis, causing some refractory/non-refractory element zonation along the channel as well as radially. It is found that some chondrites are rich in volatiles while others are depleted in a complementary fashion. The gaseous 'blast' along the discharge channel would also deform cooling molten droplets. Chondrules are found almost without exception to be non-spherical.
5. On quenching of the discharge, cooling would follow rapidly, in minutes, giving rise to the sharp inner boundary between the refractory particle shell and its core. It is difficult to provide such rapid heating and cooling in an extended nebular cloud, as is widely believed to be the birthplace of meteorites. Also, when the discharge ceases the magnetic 'pinch effect' ceases, accompanied by an explosive fall in gas pressure leading to the observed interruption to growth of the CAI's while still at high temperature.
6. By the electric discharge mechanism all shells should be formed at the same instant, under fairly uniform, highly localised conditions, thus giving rise to shells of a thickness which does not vary much from one specimen to another.
7. The plasma discharge heating would be uniform over all exposed surfaces, unlike ballistic heating in a gas, and therefore the observation that the shells follow the complex surface features of the refractory inclusions may be explained. This effect is used in industry in plasma ovens to evenly modify the surface of complex shaped objects.
8. After the discharge has extinguished, the sub-micron particles will be electrically attracted to the charged larger particles, thus giving rise to the observed halo of very fine grained matrix material surrounding the inclusions. Electrostatic attraction between the very smallest particles during the discharge might also help explain the observation that the CAI formation mechanism discriminates against small bodies.
9. The magnetic pinch effect of the discharge will cause the dispersed material and gases to accelerate radially inward towards the axis of the discharge, so that after the discharge is quenched there will be collisions of inrushing molten chondrules with the radial gaseous blast (thunderclap) giving rise to the formation of compound chondrules and grain inclusions. This also fits the observation that regions of chondrule formation were homogeneous over small distances. The thunderclap will cause volatiles to be included in some meteorite precursors. The meteoritic bodies may then be formed by agglomeration, near the spent discharge axis, of the various meteorite components; chondrules, refractory inclusions, volatiles, matrix material, etc. The mixing would be chaotic, with probable collision-induced splintering giving rise to the observed irregular forms of chondrites. This mechanism explains the mixing of high and low temperature components in chondrites as separate entities.
10. It is expected that some evidence of the electric discharge and its magnetic field would be found in remanent magnetism of some meteoritic components. It has been shown that carbonaceous chondrites and ureilites had surprisingly large ancient magnetic field intensities.
11. Such giant electric discharges would probably be of sufficient power to cause nucleosynthesis, transmutation of elements and the formation of isotopes and radionuclides. The chondrule evidence strongly suggests their origin in an unspecified energetic event, definitely not pre-Solar System, and Tom van Flandern confirms that "the presence of isotopic anomalies in carbonaceous meteorites implies the action of nuclear processes, not just chemical ones."
The observed anomaly of isotopic composition of the shells of refractory inclusions when compared with the core might be explained by ion implantation of transmuted atoms. More importantly, meteorites exhibit many other isotopic anomalies, chief among them being the appearance of isotopes of xenon and iodine which are known to be the decay products of relatively short-lived, heavy, radioactive parents. This poses problems for the conventional view in that it requires the formation of meteorites shortly after a stellar nucleosynthesis event, possibly as remnant of a supernova. Yet neither tektites nor meteorites have been found in any ancient geological formation, which suggests that most surviving meteorites are relatively quite young. Also, it has been found that the quantities of spallation-produced neon-21 in irradiated grains from some meteorites exceed that plausibly attributable to either galactic or present-day solar cosmic ray irradiation, and associated solar wind neon seems to be underabundant.
12. The electric discharge mechanism would render radiogenic dating meaningless. It would further obviate the need to have chondritic components formed millions of years apart and 'parked' before somehow being brought together to form the final chondrule.
13. It should be noted in the case of chondrule formation that lightning within a solar nebula has been proposed as a plausible mechanism, but the argument betrays a lack of understanding of plasma discharges. The electric discharge theory does away with the problematic formation of bodies from a solar nebula and introduces a new evolutionary picture, with the birth of objects from the size of stars right down to meteors by electrical parturition. This is consistent with the fact that the non-volatile components of chondrites have approximately solar proportions.
14. The astronomer, Tom van Flandern has proposed the formation of comets, meteorites, asteroids and tektites from the explosion of a larger former planet in the Solar System by some unknown mechanism. He shows how many anomalies in the characteristics of our solar system may be simply explained by such an event. The stratification of chondritic types within the asteroid belt certainly indicates at least four separate events in that region of the Solar System. The differences in composition of meteorites from those regions may be diagnostic of the parent bodies. It should be remembered that all of the giant planets have ephemeral ring systems, which by this theory are indicative of past expulsion of matter. Saturn's rings would appear to be the most recent.
UPDATE
In the October, 1993 issue of Sky & Telescope there was a report headlined "Primordial Lightning? in which evidence is provided for powerful electromagnetic surges ripping through the solar system as it was forming. Disregarding the once-upon-a-time paradigm paralysis, the meteorites show selective melting of small flecks of dark minerals inside a more transparent silicate exterior. Laboratory tests suggested that very powerful lightning discharges could have created the observed effects.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
News item 9th November 1998: SPACECRAFT NEARS ASTEROID ORBIT
https://saturniancosmology.org/othergroup/thoth/thotii18.txt
VOL II, No. 18 - Nov 15, 1998
By PAUL RECER
IN THE week before Christmas, some 262 million kilometres from Earth, the Near Earth Asteroid Rendezvous (NEAR) spacecraft will fire its rockets to begin a manoeuvre designed to make it the first man-made object to orbit an asteroid.
Andy Cheng, project scientist for NEAR, said the craft would begin orbiting the Eros asteroid on January 10, 1999. In the following months it would be lowered to orbit just 34km above the asteroid to analyse its composition, magnetic field and mass. Eros is about the size of a mountain, 38km by 13km. Its orbit routinely carries it close to the orbit of Earth. Scientists don't know if the rock is solid or if it is a highly porous body with empty cavities or chunks of ice.
Like most asteroids, said Cheng, Eros probably formed early in the history of the solar system, either as part of a bigger planet or as a lone object.
After months in orbit, researchers may attempt to put the craft on to the surface of Eros. Cheng said the spacecraft was not designed to land, but that is one option the researchers are considering. The density of Eros is unknown, but the asteroid is so small that its gravity force will be only a fraction of Earth's, making landing there less violent.
But it would still be tricky steering the craft to a touchdown because Eros is so far away that it takes 45 minutes for a radio signal to make a round trip journey between the Earth and NEAR.
Associated Press
Comments by WAL THORNHILL:
The NEAR spacecraft is due to rendezvous with the 14km by 38km mountain of an asteroid, EROS, in January next year. The notion of "landing" on the asteroid is being considered. It is not known what to expect. Is it made of ice, rubble or green cheese?
The nebular theory of the formation of solid objects in the solar system is absurd. It creates ten new problems for every "solution" it provides. I expect therefore that the composition of the asteroid will deviate from expectations based on assumed primordial isotopic ratios.
Like the astronomer Tom Van Flandern, I believe it was once a part of a planet. It will be constituted like a planetary mountain. It may even show signs of igneous activity or sedimentary stratification. That would give the space geologists a headache! However, unlike Tom who believes that a former planet exploded, I predict that it will show signs of its electrical birth. That birth occurred as a normal effect of interplanetary discharges following a close approach of two planets. Most likely, it is a fragment of the 2 million cubic kilometres missing from the Valles Marineris on Mars. Mars was renowned of old for his entourage of flaming meteors.
As part of the electrical birth process, the asteroid will have been struck by plasma discharges These produce characteristically neat, circular craters and a melted glassy deposit in the centre of many - unlike impacts but like those found by astronauts in small craters on the Moon. Also, like other asteroids, it may exhibit a somewhat "blackened and burnt in an oven" appearance. Its isotopic composition should have the signature of its parent planet, altered on the surface by ion implantation and nuclear transformations caused by powerful cosmic lightning.
Attempts to determine the density and bulk composition of the asteroid from its apparent gravity will likely give results inconsistent with the surface composition. Maybe they will need to postulate a dense iron core to make up the difference in observed densities between the surface material and the entire object - just as they do with planets and large moons!
Any attempt to land the NEAR spacecraft on the asteroid runs the risk of electrical discharges on touchdown which could damage the craft's electronics unless precautions have been taken. Of course, the longer the spacecraft orbits the asteroid the less this danger will be because the solar wind plasma has a limited ability to slowly equalise the voltages of the two objects while in close proximity.
As an aside: with the idea of landing a spacecraft on an asteroid and all of the recent worry about Near Earth Objects, or NEO's, possibly the best way of moving a NEO into a non-threatening orbit is to make it an artificial comet by charging or discharging the object. Some of NASA's new ion propulsion units modified to emit a charged beam and planted on the NEO surface might be good for the job. The thrust would be totally inadequate to change the asteroid's orbit appreciably. However, it would change the electrical charge on the NEO which in turn would alter its gravity and, as a consequence, shift its orbit. This is precisely what happens to comets as they emit jets of ions and change their orbits in a non-Newtonian manner. It is conventionally "explained" by poorly defined non-gravitational forces.
Wal Thornhill
Karen Tackett asks:
Do you know if there is any plans to attempt an orbital diversion of an NEO (before we HAVE to do it)? It's disconcerting to think that "they" might let one of those slam into earth before admitting that the idea you expressed here might be worth a try.
Wal says:
So far as we know, no NEO's presently threaten the Earth. Anyway I'm not convinced that NEO's pose the threat to the Earth that astronomers think they do.
I'm sure that one of the reasons for the NEAR mission is to get an idea of how easy it would be to disrupt an asteroid. Right now though, unless the military crazies have a plan, I don't know of any planned mission to blow up a NEO to show it can be done.
On the CD [_The Electric Universe_ by Wallace Thornhill, latest edition available soon] I mention the present millennial preoccupation with Doomsday due to the imagined threat of a NEO. I point out that the effects are quite different from those expected because electrical effects are ignored and misunderstood. In fact the Earth has its own "anti-ballistic" system built in so the perceived need for us to intervene may be a product of our faulty science.
Mr. M. wrote:
So you predict its <Eros'> isotopic composition should resemble Mars'?
Wal replies: Yes, if its parent was Mars. The bulk isotopic composition will reflect that of its parent.
This means that eventually we may be able to identify both the players and their rough positions in the solar system at the time of past catastrophes. We can do this by associating the asteroids in a given family (I believe there have been 4 distinct families of asteroids identified) with their parent planets. I feel that the asteroid belt indicates the general area where the final breakup of the Saturnian system took place. Since then Saturn has relaxed back to its distant orbit where it has established a new electrogravitic equilibrium.
>Wal wrote (previously): As part of the electrical birth process, the asteroid will have been struck by plasma discharges. These produce characteristically neat, circular craters and a melted glassy deposit in the centre of many - unlike impacts but like those found by astronauts in small craters on the Moon.
Mr. M. asked: Are there any craters on earth that have melted glassy deposits in the centre?
Wal replies: Ordinary lightning can create fulgurites (melted sand) in very dry soil. The detailed form of electrical scarring on a solid object's surface depends upon a myriad factors. For example, both the Earth and it seems, Europa, have a surface which is basically of highly conductive salty water. It will not crater but distribute charge globally in a very efficient manner. On Europa the current carrying channels have been preserved in a frozen state. On Earth, there may be little trace because the conductor is a liquid.
I chose the Moon as an example because it has extreme dryness and no atmosphere - like an asteroid. Because the Earth is a wet planet, the heat generated in an electrical cratering episode tends to create an excavated, explosive crater with shock metamorphosis of the central cone and little melting of the floor. Note that the arc does not impinge on the centre of the crater but rather moves in a circle or tight, expanding spiral about the centre. [Note ... : since repeating the anode cratering experiments here and videotaping them, I have changed my opinion on the direction of the spiral action of the arc. I now can show that it is from the centre outwards. On reflection, that makes perfect sense]. On the dry Moon this creates a flat, melted floor with terraces on the very steep walls of the crater and melted floors on some terraces. In some notable instances it creates corkscrew shaped craters! My new CD, The Electric Universe, features video clips of experiments which help to graphically explain some of the differences in cratering effects.
Of course, the work has not yet been attempted by professional geologists to look at this new interpretation of so-called impact craters. Unfortunately, they will first have to see it happening before they are likely to believe it possible. Jupiter's moon Io will someday provide the proof by example because it is happening there continually.
>Wal wrote: > Also, like other asteroids, it may exhibit a somewhat "blackened and burnt in an oven" appearance. Its isotopic composition should have the signature of its parent planet, altered on the surface by ion implantation and nuclear transformations caused by powerful cosmic lightning.
Mr. M. queried: So its isotopic composition *won't* resemble Mars'? Or we won't be able to tell its isotopic composition?
Wal replies: The bulk isotopic composition of the asteroid should match precisely some scarred area of its parent body, be it Mars or another planet or moon. A difficulty may arise from the fact that the composition of the asteroid will be judged from its exposed surface. Now, chondritic meteorites exhibit anomalous isotopic composition on the surface of the melted chondrules. As I have explained in detail on the CD, this is likely to be due to ion implantation etc. So I expect the same effect to be evident on larger bodies that were born in the same event as the meteorites. Without taking a cored sample from the asteroid (not in the NEAR program) we won't know for sure.
Mr. M. asks: How does lightning transmute elements? Dave Talbott wrote something about lightning turning oxygen into sulphur. He said it was your idea so I'll ask you about it: This process liberates a lot of energy, but requires temperatures on the order of billions of degrees. How does your model overcome the Coulomb Barrier? What happens to the excess energy?
Wal replies: Cosmic lightning (quite distinct from the puny sparks in our atmosphere) is perfectly energetic enough to transmute elements. The problem comes about when physicists talk of the temperature required to initiate nuclear fusion, usually in the tens of millions degrees (not billions). Temperature is a measure of the energy of random motion of atoms. But the energy in an electric discharge is highly directional - in other words, non-random. The concept of temperature does not apply in this circumstance. That is why we routinely use powerful electric and magnetic fields in our nuclear laboratories to overcome the coulomb barrier and initiate nuclear reactions. (My CD also discusses low energy transmutation of elements).
Astrophysicists have painted themselves into a theoretical corner because they ignore the possibility of electrical discharge phenomena in plasma. It is not even taught as part of the postgraduate astrophysics plasma physics course in leading universities. Instead they talk of energetic "magnetic reconnection events" in plasma. These are a magical theoretical construct to avoid recognising them for what they really are - sites of electric discharges. I use the word "magical" because there is no physical meaning to, or demonstration of the notion that magnetic field lines can perform the trick of breaking and reconnecting.
The excess energy from the oxygen to sulphur "fritting" is released as radiant energy in the plasmoid, rather like (or probably the same as in) ball lightning. Notice that interplanetary lightning is in a form similar to ball lightning and travels between planets like "a coal spat from a fire", according to eyewitnesses. If the transmutation takes place on a surface then the energy would contribute to melting and blast effects. The reddish colouration of the levees on the larger channels on Europa I have attributed to conversion of oxygen from the water there to sulphur. It was created by the lightning which streaked across the surface, ripping giant furrows through the ice.
Oxygenated compounds on the surface of Io are being converted continually to sulphur by Jovian electric arcs giving the pizza look to the electric moon.
And Mars, which had much more water in the recent past, has a sulphur rich "duricrust" to its soil which is the result of conversion of oxygen from that water to sulphur by cosmic lightning.
Wal Thornhill
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
SHOEMAKER-LEVI SPECULATIONS By Wal Thornhill
https://saturniancosmology.org/othergroup/thoth/thoiii06.txt
VOL III, No. 6 - March 31, 1999
Jim Bowles wrote:
Shumacher-Levy, of course, blew up.
CARDONA BUTTS IN:
Shoemaker-Levy did not blow up. It broke apart.
Dwardu.
WAL THORNHILL ADDS:
The comet may never have been a single object. Tom Van Flandern has proposed that asteroids and comets may be comprised of several closely orbiting pieces that are separated when the more powerful gravitational influence of a planet or the Sun overwhelms the weak gravitational binding force between them.
Tom was partly vindicated by the unexpected and serendipitous discovery that asteroid Ida has a tiny "moon". He proposes that such objects were created by a "recently" exploded planet, possibly in a nova-like outburst. But there is no good conventional explanation for such stellar explosions.
In the electrical model of the formation of asteroids and comets, they have a common origin in a stream of gas and matter removed from a planet by a powerful electric discharge. The solids cover a wide range of sizes from dust to planetessimals. The opportunity for gravitational and electrostatic "clumping together" is very high under these circumstances but far less for a simple mechanical explosion. Clumping is a phenomenon evidenced in chondritic meteorites where the meteorite has been formed from gas, dust, aspheric molten droplets and splintered pieces of pre- existing solids. The lack of sphericity of the glassy droplets is a great puzzle to astronomers since the weightlessness and vacuum of space is the ideal environment for liquids acting under surface tension to form perfect spheres. The droplets were frozen as they were being accelerated, either by electrical forces or by the gaseous blast of the cosmic "thunderclap".
Strong evidence for the electrical model is found in the chondrules within such meteorites. They all show evidence of complex surface effects which I believe could be easily replicated in a plasma oven. (Refer to my CD for a much fuller explanation). It all points very strongly to a form of "lightning" having been responsible for some of the features found in meteorites. Several astronomers have subscribed to that view but placed the event in a pre-planetary nebula. The problem with that scenario is that the minerals in most meteorites show that they have come from a pre-existing planet.
Back to the argument: there is the likelihood that the break up of comets like Shoemaker-Levy 9 is also affected by electrical forces when plasma discharges impinge preferentially on one component of the comet or another. That could create impulsive electrostatic forces between the components and will change the gravitational force between them as well. Many comets have been seen to break up during their bright, electrically active phase.
Wal Thornhill
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
So NEAR, yet so far from UNDERSTANDING By Wal Thornhill
https://saturniancosmology.org/othergroup/thoth/thotiv09.txt
VOL IV, No 9 - May 31, 2000
On Valentine's Day, 2000, the Near Earth Asteroid Rendezvous (NEAR) spacecraft [went] into orbit around asteroid 433 Eros. It will be the first spacecraft to orbit an asteroid. NEAR will examine the odd-shaped rock, about twice the size of Manhattan Island, for about a year.
What do we expect to learn from this adventure? Astronomers agree that it is a chance to examine material left over from the formation of the solar system. Maybe they are pieces of a failed planet? In any case, the usual mantra is invoked: it will help us understand the origin of the solar system. Yet images returned from close fly-bys of asteroids together with Hubble Space Telescope images of the large asteroid, Vesta, have already provided more puzzles than answers. That situation will continue while we remain so far from understanding what we are looking at. The accepted model for the origin of the solar system is a modern "fairy story", in the words of one noted astronomer, requiring ad hoc miracles to occur on every page in order to arrive at a happy ending.
The biggest puzzle concerns the amazingly large craters on most of the asteroids. They create severe problems for the impact theory of accretion but astronomers have no alternative mechanism to offer. In an article in Science of 19 December 1997, titled "New View of Asteroids", Erik Asphaug writes:
"Last June, NEAR flew by the main belt asteroid 233 Mathilde ... Although the resolution was 50 times as coarse as expected at Eros, the images of Mathilde reveal some surprises and provoke an overdue reevaluation of asteroid geophysics. Mathilde has survived blow after blow with almost farcical impunity, accommodating five great craters with diameters from 3/4 to 5/4 the asteroids mean radius, and none leaving any hint of global devastation. Given that one of these great craters was last to form, preexisting craters ought to bear major scars of seismic degradation, which they do not. Furthermore, asteroids Gaspra and Ida (encountered by Galileo en-route to Jupiter) and the small satellite Phobos all exhibit fracture grooves related to impact, yet fracture grooves are absent on the larger, more battered Mathilde. .....
Consider the third largest asteroid, 4 Vesta, a basalt-covered volcanic body 530 km in diameter that resembles the Moon as much as it does Mathilde or Toutatis. Recent views (36 km per pixel) by the Hubble Space Telescope show a 460 km crater, with raised rim and central peak, covering the entire southern hemisphere - an impact scar surpassing (in relative diameter, but not relative depth) the great chasms of Mathilde.
Such craters greatly challenge our understanding of impact processes on asteroids, and on planets in general; evidently, our science must adapt. The study of asteroids is therefore particularly exciting, as small planets provide the fulcrum for the growth of planetology, and for an evolution of geophysics in general. Complex and poorly understood solar system processes - such as impact cratering, accretion and catastrophic disruption, the evolution of volcanic structures, and the triggering of differentiation - may reveal themselves only in a study across the gamut of planets, from the least significant house-sized rock to the most stately terrestrial world. Like clockwork miniatures, asteroids demonstrate primary principles governing planetary evolution at an accessible scale, and thousands await discovery and exploration in near-Earth space alone."
In the Electric Universe model, moons, asteroids, comets and meteors are created in electrical discharges between planetary bodies. They are ripped from a planet's surface by electrical forces that easily overwhelm the weak gravitational force. The most well known, albeit unrecognized, arc scar from a recent planetary encounter is seen on Mars in the form of the colossal Valles Marineris canyons.
Two million cubic kilometers of rock was excavated by the arc and hurled into space. Some fell back to form the strewn fields of boulders seen by every Mars lander. Some remained in orbit to become the two moons of Mars, Phobos and Deimos.
(It is just possible that there is more rubble in orbit about Mars that has been the cause of inexplicable failures of spacecraft on arrival there). The rest formed meteors and a belt of asteroids. This model simply explains why many meteorites contain minerals whose crystals show that they must have formed inside a planet. It explains the origin of the Martian meteorites that are arriving on Earth. And the electric arc mechanism explains simply the strange flash heating of chondrules and other minerals in meteorites. So, if EROS' parent was Mars it may show similarities to Martian rocks.
The most compelling evidence of their electrical birth is that all asteroids imaged to date bear scars in the diagnostic form of circular electric arc cratering. One large crater on asteroid Vesta has an untouched central peak. Impacts do not form circular craters with sharp rims - they "splatter". They don't form central peaks. Small secondary craters appear preferentially on the raised rims of earlier craters while the reverse is never seen - which also rules out an impact origin.
Crater-filled grooves, seen clearly on Phobos have nothing to do with impact fracturing and are merely small sinuous rilles created by surface lightning streaking toward the main arc.
Sinuous rilles are not collapsed lava tubes. Since electrical cratering is a slower process than sudden and does not involve mechanical shock to the same extent, there is little disturbance of pre-existing craters - as seen dramatically on Mathilde.
It is worth noting the odd low apparent density of asteroids. In such cases, astronomers introduce another ad-hoc assumption the asteroid is porous, containing up 60% free space. But that raises the question of how, in model, such an object could sustain any sizeable impact without shattering. In contrast, the Electric Universe model expects that a low level of charge on the surface of an object will lower its measured gravitational influence. For example, comets display non-Newtonian behaviour simply because they are visibly discharging and changing their state of electric charge. So a low density may be due to the electrical state of an asteroid rather than any porosity. In that case, the surface minerals will have a higher density, as measured on Earth, than the gravity of the asteroid would lead us to believe. Certainly, the asteroids do not give the appearance of being a "rubble pile". If asteroids maintained their integrity under the intense electrical forces that removed them from a planet they must have considerable mechanical strength.
Having been "born" in a cataclysm created by a powerful electric discharge there may be strong remanent magnetism in any susceptible minerals on an asteroid. Strong magnetic remanence has been inferred on the asteroid Gaspra, equaling the Earth's field strength, and it is a distinguishing feature of meteorites. The process of electrical cratering will regions of anomalously strong patterns of magnetism. In addition, nuclear processes are to be expected. So nucleosynthesis, transmutation of elements and the formation of isotopes and radionuclides will have had an effect on the surface of asteroids similar to that seen in meteorites where odd isotopes occur from short-lived heavy parent radio-nuclides and others do not match those found in the solar wind.
In order to advance we require much more than that "our science must adapt" or that understanding of these processes will come about from "an evolution of geophysics". It will require nothing less than a revolution in science before understanding is possible. That revolution begins with discarding the fairy tales about the formation of the solar system and returning to the laboratory to study the effects of electric discharges on model planetary surfaces. However that might be difficult for those who believe unshakably in their childhood stories and for many of the modern "virtual reality" computer generation.
~Wal Thornhill See the home of The Electric Universe at http://www.holoscience.com