hi doma,
"You cannot have a magnetic field without an
Electric field!" Indeed. And of course, electro-magnetic forces are part of standard theory.
"Plasma scientists in the lab have shown that electrical discharges produce craters as seen
on all rocky planets." I have thrown a rock into mud and made a crater. It's a theory until you can test it in a live planetary environment. Or faith, if you will, pending evidence.
Nasa's prevailing theory is that there's water,dust and other gases in comets even after comets Wild 2 and Borrelly. I don't see any signs that the electric comet theory is taken seriously except by a small group of electric theorists.
So how should these theorists overturn the standard model. Perform tests that show results which convince folks that they are right. If they succeed in doing so, all well and good. But pretending you have proofs when all you have is hypotheses is a good way to make the theory seem wacky.
The fact that scientists still have questions is the normal condition. It is rare that the answers overthrow everything that has come before. Most times they just affect what we know about that particular thing. In this case, and speaking for myself, I suspect comets will yield comety knowledge. Things that explain the comet's tail based on existing science. But not a new theory of physics.
| 