The Philae landing craft on to Comet 67P is already highly unlikely to succeed due to very surprising findings about the comet, compounded by scientific theory on comet formation that have created its landing procedure. Surprising findings that is to mainstream science but not the EU Theory followers.
If Philae fails to land on Comet 67P what will be the reasons and will it be more evidence for the Electric Universe theory from the Rosetta mission?
Reasons for a failed Philae landing
- The shape of the comet.
- Comet 67P has numerous boulders, some are massive. It has craters and cliffs.
- It’s gravity is very weak.
- Philae’s landing speed is double the comets escape velocity.
- Its landing harpoons and ice screws were designed for a dirty snowball.
- It already has active jets with complex molecules when to far away for sublimation by the suns heat.
- The comet is spinning in a surprising way.
Philae landing and Comet 67P’s gravity
Philae will reach the surface at roughly walking pace, around 1 m/s. That may not sound like much, but as the comet’s surface gravity is roughly one hundred thousand times weaker than Earth’s, a sophisticated system must be used to prevent it from rebounding into space. The three-legged landing gear will absorb the momentum and use it to drive an ice screw in each foot into the surface. At the same time, two harpoons will fire to lock the probe onto the surface, and a small thruster on top may be used to counteract the recoil of the harpoon.
Rosetta Comet Landing Press Kit (pdf)
The harpoon and ice screws should work as planned with no trouble, if comet Churyumov–Gerasimenko is a dirty snowball but it appears to be anything other than an ice mountain. Its calculated density is half that of ice, leading scientists to now suggest that comet 67P is either hollow or a dusty aggregate. It actually looks to be made of rock, meaning the harpoons and screws are unlikely to work.
Worse news is that the ‘every force has an equal and opposite force’ idea may be to much force to keep the lander on the surface. If the force does push the harpoons into the surface then great, no issues. But if the harpoons are fired into rock and they bounce off this will be combined with the opposite force on Philae, meaning it should shoot back into space. Unless those thrusters do a great job?
Hopefully the down thrusters will be enough to keep it on the surface then Comet 67P’s gravity will do the rest. But here is the main problem, the suggested gravity of Comet 67P is very weak and the Philae lander is going to land at double that speed. This speed is 1 meter per second which although not much is double the comets suggested gravity escape speed.
Could comet 67P’s gravity or a local electromagnetic force help to keep the Philae landing craft down on the surface? After all the many boulders and apparent dust are on the Rosetta comets surface. How did they get there and stay there?
Could its surface gravity be stronger than predicted by science or could could some form of electrostatic/electromagnetic energy be keeping them attached to the surface? Especially if gravity is an electromagnetic force in an Electric Universe. Or are all the boulders actually attached to the surface at their base?
Successful Philae landing on Comet 67P?
Hopefully it will be a successful Philae landing, as that is great news for future evidence for the Electric Universe Theory. The fact that the comet is so different to what is expected, that the Philae’s chosen landing site is due to the comets surprising shape and geology, that the jets have already started, are suggested as Electric Universe evidence. Then there are the results of the scientific experiments on the way down to the comet and if it lands and stays on the comet. These should give more evidence that it is an Electric Universe.
- The down thruster was not operational before Philae left Rosetta.
- The ice screws did not screw into the surface.
- The landing speed was slower than expected.
- The damping legs could not compensate enough (a surface layer to hard for the predicted density?), with the lander bouncing perhaps 1 km back into space for its first bounce. The landing spot surfaced look dusty and rocky from 40 meters above the surface.
- The harpoons failed to fire. Will we ever know if this was a blessing or curse, especially as the down thruster was not working and the ice screws did not fix it to the surface?
@msbentley (Mark Bentley, planetary scientist involved in the mission) Deciding whether to re-fire the harpoons is tricky – without the hold-down thruster, presumably @Philae2014 could recoil? #CometLanding
- The current resting place for the Philae lander (finally wedged up against a crater rim wall or a cliff?) looks very rocky for a dirty snowball.
Everything Is Electric?
Steve the newly recognised aurora plasma phenomenon or Steve Birkeland (current)? Steve the scalable Kristian Birkeland filament? If plasma phenomena are scalable then is...
Does E=mc2 or EU=mc2? https://youtu.be/Usz28nAYdT0?t=8m33s E or EU = mc2 or? Is it Albert Einstein's equation of E=mc2 in a Gravity Universe or EU=mc2 in an Electric Univers...
What does an Electric Universe mean for UFO's, alien spaceships or ultra advanced craft? Does EU theory start to give a possible cause as to how alien spacecraft could technical...