Friday, July 25, 2025

Just gonna beat it to death (3I/ATLAS)

 

Interstellar invader Comet 3I/ATLAS 

is packed with water ice that could be older than Earth

Space.com 7/23/25 


Let me sum it up for you real quick:


Still no evidence of any of:


 "the spectral fingerprints 

of gas emission 

from various molecules, 

such as C_2, NH_2, CN"


And it is within the range 

where we should start to see some outgassing.

(3-4 AU)

And Hubble has had 4 days now

 I think it is to look at it.


IT AINT WHAT THEY 

ARE TELLING YOU IT IS


Called it the day I first read

an article about it 

that it wasnt going to outgas

and was concerned about 

potential perturbations with Mars

and was surprised the first article I read

didn't say anything about that

and have yet to see anybody 

write anything about

potential perturbations with Mars.


"The team's observations, made with the SpeX instrument on the NASA Infrared Telescope Facility (IRTF), perched upon the mountain Mauna Kea in Hawaii, and the Gemini Multi-Object Spectrograph equipped on the Gemini South Telescope in Chile."


(So it seems like they would have picked up

any:

"spectral fingerprints 

of gas emission 

from various molecules, 

such as C_2, NH_2, CN"

but they didn't.)


"3I/ATLAS is an active comet. It clearly shows a coma and likely contains a significant amount of water ice," Bin Yang, the leader of this new research and a scientist at the Universidad Diego Portales, told Space.com. 

"Its physical activity 

confirms its classification 

as a comet."


(No it does not :

The Elongated Image of 3I/ATLAS

"While 3I/ATLAS may well be a comet, 

this elongation should not be taken 

as evidence for its cometary tail. 

So far, spectroscopic data on 3I/ATLAS ...

do not reveal the spectral features 

of cometary gas but only show reddening 

of reflected sunlight, 

consistent with a compact dust cloud 

or the surface of a solid object."


Why are they being so emphatic 

about it being classified as a comet

is my question?


Just like why were Trump

and JD Vance so emphatic

about Iran's nuclear program 

having been 

"Obliterated"?


It tells you whats up.

A rich man 

doesn't need to prove he is rich

to anybody,

he already knows it.

So there is no need to prove it.


We are three weeks in with this object

They have ran Spectroscopy from Hubble

(which is better suited than

 the instruments listed above)

And still no signs of commetary gas molecules.


And still they are being emphatic 

about it being a comet.

It may not send off alarm bells with you?

But it sure does with me.


I mean, how many times 

do they have to repeat the same mantra 

over and over and over?

And why would they feel the need 

to have to keep doing so?

Bin Yang writes for Gizmodo or something?)


"The most exciting finding 

was the presence of 

water ice features in the coma."


(Now compare that 

to what he said right before it:

"It clearly shows a coma 

and likely contains 

a significant amount of water ice,"


Im a lil confussed.

So does it:

"Likely contain...

water ice FEATURES"

Or does the coma show:

"the presence of water ice"

??????????)


"Comas are the nebulous envelopes of gas" 


(Then where are the signatures 

of the gas molecules?)


and dust that surround comets. This material has been expelled from within a comet's nucleus — that means analyzing it with a technique called spectroscopy can tell astronomers what the rock and ice of that comet is composed of."


(They ran that with Hubble 

which is better suited for

running the spectroscopy on 3I

and they didn't find any

signatures of gas molecules.)


"We obtained visible and near-infrared spectra of 3I/ATLAS as it approached the sun," Yang said. "However, no gas emissions were detected."


(Well I wonder why that could be?

The Elongated Image of 3I/ATLAS


"While 3I/ATLAS may well be a comet, 

this elongation should not be taken 

as evidence for its cometary tail. 

So far, spectroscopic data on 3I/ATLAS... 

do not reveal the spectral features 

of cometary gas but only show reddening 

of reflected sunlight, 

consistent with a compact dust cloud 

or the surface of a solid object."


AND where is the explanation

for there being no gas emissions?

The explanation?

Is in the information

that just preceded these comments.)


"Yang and colleagues found that 

while 3I/ATLAS is undoubtedly a comet,"


(No!

No it most certainly has not been found to be:

"undoubtedly a comet"

(as demonstrated above)

and why do the author 

and the researcher

feel so compelled to

keep defending that classification 

so emphatically three weeks in?


Somebody is driving the narrative

about this object

:-) :-) :-) :-) :-)

and others just dont like it apparently.


TOUGH.)


 "...some of its spectroscopic characteristics and its dust composition resemble D-type asteroids."


(Oh you mean the huge ones

that the Martian moon 

Phobos is closely related to?

Well isnt that interesting.

Why are we leaving that out?)


"These are bodies from the main asteroid belt with organic molecule-rich silicates and carbon with water ice in their interiors.


(Love how "possibly" gets skipped over

when talking about:

"with water ice in their interiors"

(Reference: Jones, Thomas D.; Lebofsky, Larry A.; Lewis, John S.; Marley, Mark S. (1990-11-01). "The composition and origin of the C, P, and D asteroids: Water as a tracer of thermal evolution in the outer belt". Icarus. 88 (1): 172–192. Bibcode:1990Icar...88..172J. doi:10.1016/0019-1035(90)90184-B. ISSN 0019-1035.)


"If the initial water ice detection is confirmed, it could indeed represent some of the oldest and most pristine water ever observed, formed in another planetary system and preserved throughout its interstellar journey," Yang said."


"Yang emphasized that 

there is yet to be 

a direct detection 

of individual compounds 

around 3I/ATLAS, 

with these results representing 

an inferred composition."


(So all of this?

Just for:

no 

"direct detection 

of individual compounds"

and?

"these results 

representing 

an inferred composition"


(deduce or conclude 

(information) 

from evidence 

(lacking so far yo)

and reasoning 

rather than from 

explicit statements.

(Or in this case, evidence)


"Observing it near perihelion [its closest approach to the sun gave us a rare opportunity to study how interstellar material behaves under solar heating, an exciting and scientifically valuable event,"


(Then there should be some evidence 

of gas molecules

and there isn't, 

and not only that, 

it is made worse

by the fact that

there is no explanation given

as to why evidence of those gas molecules

 could be lacking.)


"Yall gonna make me

loose my mind

up in here, up in here..."


Time to make some decisions 

about your souls conscious energy 

final resting place. 

Quick like in a hurry yo.

No comments: