In comet, how the tail follow nucleus when gravity very weak?

tan ε = V/ω

V = component of the comet's orbital velocity perpendicular to the radius vector
ω = radial solar-wind speed
ε = tail lag or aberration angle

It might help if you quoted your sources. Without my wasting any time on it, on the surface that video seems to assume a 100% coupling between solar wind and the comet's tail.

More evidence that we are dealing with a chatbot which is programmed to deny, nothing else.

Are you finally admitting you are a chatbot and there is no intelligence behind your posts?

Let me know when you plan on admitting what the videos actually show.
Further conversing with you seems entirely pointless as you are just repeating the same refuted crap again and again, completely denying what the video clearly shows.

You have proven no one wrong, just like always.

You have not been able to refute anything at all, a sure sign of personal delusion. You are here only to deny, an option which makes you look ridiculous in face of the obvious proofs.

In order not to increase the bandwidth unnecessarily, the four videos can be found here:

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=76180.msg2067004#msg2067004

We have a formula which is totally defied by the comets NEAT, 96P/Machholz and C/2011 L4 (PanSTARRS).

In fact, for comet NEAT we have the data from the SOHO spacecraft:

http://umtof.umd.edu/pm/crn/archive/CRN_1999.HTML (the solar wind speed data recorded by the SOHO spacecraft)

The maximum solar wind speed was a full 916km/s, and yet no visible effects on the comet's coma/tail were observed at all.


The most conspicuous proof that the solar wind has nothing to do with the lag/aberration angle of a comet's tail comes from comet 17P/Holmes.

Comet 17P/Holmes is not affected at all by solar radiation pressure, solar wind blasts or solar gravitational forces:





Its coma retains its beautiful spherical shape, totally unaffected by any force/pressure exerted by the Sun.


http://www2.ess.ucla.edu/~jewitt/papers/2010/SKJ10.pdf

"We do not detect any systematic acceleration of the fragments
between 2007 November 6 and 2007 November 14 UT,
since a single mean velocity over the observational data set predicts
a time of ejection that agrees with the published eruption
time (Wilkening et al. 2007). This suggests two things: first,
that radiation pressure does not significantly affect the motion
of the fragments."

Especially if the expansion velocity is high, it may completely dominate the radiation-pressure effects for days or even weeks.

tan ε = V/ω

V = component of the comet's orbital velocity perpendicular to the radius vector
ω = radial solar-wind speed
ε = tail lag or aberration angle

(Introduction to Comets, John C. Brandt, Robert D. Chapman, pg 155)

While orbiting the Sun, NO TAIL LAG ANGLE IS VISIBLE AT ALL, none whatsoever, in the face of direct solar wind blasts.

The gravitational force exerted by the Sun on grain particle (700,000 km distance from the comet's nucleus), according to Newton, is ~10¹⁴ greater than the gravitational force exerted by the comet itself.

Yet, comet 17P/Holmes retains its spherical shape.

"I have never in my experience as a cometary scientist seen such a symmetric structure in emitted material," admits Carey Lisse of Johns Hopkins University's Applied Physics Laboratory.

This comet's behavior, particularly the perfectly spherical outer halo, has confounded even the experts.

(Sky and Telescope, Astronomy News, Nov. 15, 2007)

You have not been able to refute anything at all, a sure sign of personal delusion. You are here only to deny, an option which makes you look ridiculous in face of the obvious proofs.

Good job projecting.
Now how about you address the fact that the tail is clearly affected?

Certainly the tail is affected at a great distance from the Sun, but not by solar wind.

In order to answer this question, in the FE context, a great controversy has to be resolved.

It is, by far, the biggest mystery of modern astrophysics (far beyond the big bang debate, dark energy/dark matter, origin of uranium paradox, faint young sun paradox).

Here is Dr. Stuart D. Bale, UC Berkeley, presenting the crux of the matter succinctly:



Does the solar corona reach a temperature of 2 million degrees Celsius or not?

Recently, scientists have even suggested that the temperature of the corona is even higher than that of the core itself.

In order to answer this question, in the FE context, a great controversy has to be resolved.

Yes, such as where the sun even is, which makes no sense in the FE context.
So how about considering this is a discussion in the RE context we stick to that.

presenting the crux of the matter succinctly:

You mean yourself, running off on yet another tangent rather than sticking to the topic of the thread, discussing the tails of comets.

It is well known that solar winds do affect the tail of comets.
It is well known that different size particles can come off comets and each are not affected to the same result.

These comets are not the massive problem you are pretending they are.

A TOTAL SPHERICAL SHAPE!

How could such a gravitationally minuscule body hold in place a uniform, spherical coma 7 million kilometers in diameter?

"Minuscule" is not zero. Absent nearby massive objects, that's what tends to happen.

How could it maintain a spherical shape against the effects of the solar wind?

It won't be perfectly spherical.

The photographs prove it in no uncertain manner.

A total defiance of Newtonian mechanics!

A PERFECT SPHERICAL SHAPE FOR COMET HOLMES P17!

<Pictures that look kinda' sorta' circular on casual inspection>

The red circle is a circle. The coma isn't perfectly spherical. That's one of the pictures you offered as "proof". The others are less obvious.

Oops....

The end.

A TOTAL DEFIANCE OF NEWTONIAN MECHANICS.

Nope. All you have are pictures that look kinda' sorta' spherical on casual inspection. If you ignore the obvious issue that the bright nucleus isn't centered in the "perfect sphere". Oops.

"I have never in my experience as a cometary scientist seen such a symmetric structure in emitted material," admits Carey Lisse of Johns Hopkins University's Applied Physics Laboratory.

This comet's behavior, particularly the perfectly spherical outer halo, has confounded even the experts.

(Sky and Telescope, Astronomy News, Nov. 15, 2007)


The comet 17P/Holmes retains a spherical coma, defying the solar radiation pressure upon the dust particles, defying the solar wind blasts upon the gas, defying the solar gravitational forces upon the grain particles found at 700,000 km from its nucleus.

A total defiance of Newtonian mechanics.

The comet is an unprecedented half a million times brighter than before the eruption began. This amazing eruption of the comet is produced by dust ejected from a tiny solid nucleus made of ice and rock, only 3.6 km (roughly 2.2 miles) in diameter.

How does such a gravitationally minuscule body hold in place a uniform, spherical coma 7 million kilometers in diameter?

How could it maintain a spherical shape against the effects of the solar wind?

The unexplained ability of a relatively minuscule comet nucleus to hold in place a highly spherical coma, up to millions of miles in diamater, against the force of the solar wind.

A perfect spherical shape:




The solar radiation pressure has no effect at all on comet 17P/Holmes.


http://www2.ess.ucla.edu/~jewitt/papers/2010/SKJ10.pdf

"We do not detect any systematic acceleration of the fragments
between 2007 November 6 and 2007 November 14 UT,
since a single mean velocity over the observational data set predicts
a time of ejection that agrees with the published eruption
time (Wilkening et al. 2007). This suggests two things: first,
that radiation pressure does not significantly affect the motion
of the fragments."

Especially if the expansion velocity is high, it may completely dominate the radiation-pressure effects for days or even weeks.

This means that the β factor is equal to zero.


The solar wind blasts has no effect at all on comet 17P/Holmes.

tan ε = V/ω

V = component of the comet's orbital velocity perpendicular to the radius vector
ω = radial solar-wind speed
ε = tail lag or aberration angle


The solar gravitational forces have no effect at all on comet 17P/Holmes.

The force exerted by the Sun on a grain particle at a distance of 700,000km from the comet's nucleus is ~10¹⁴ greater than the gravitational force exerted by the entire comet (nucleus + coma + tail).

A TOTAL DEFIANCE OF NEWTONIAN MECHANICS.

This comet's behavior, particularly the perfectly spherical outer halo, has confounded even the experts.

It has been shown that that is not the case. It is not perfectly spherical.
There is also no indication that it has confounded anyone.

Are you capable of responding to what people have said, or just repeating the same refuted claims?

Repeating the same nonsense doesn't make it true.

There is also no indication that it has confounded anyone.

Comet Holmes 17P has made international headlines with an energetic outburst that has left astronomers speechless. The website skyandtelescope.com has called it "the weirdest new object to appear in the sky in memory." "For no apparent reason," the comet began to increase in luminosity, rapidly brightening from 17th magnitude to about 2.5 -- approximately a million-fold increase in brightness.

"I have never in my experience as a cometary scientist seen such a symmetric structure in emitted material," admits Carey Lisse of Johns Hopkins University's Applied Physics Laboratory.

This comet's behavior, particularly the perfectly spherical outer halo, has confounded even the experts.

(Sky and Telescope, Astronomy News, Nov. 15, 2007)

Even world-famous astronomers were caught off-guard. Alan Hale, co-discoverer of Comet Hale-Bopp, heard about Comet Holmes from astronomers in Spain and Japan.

"I went out and saw that it was bright enough to see as a naked-eye star," Hale said. "By the time I saw it the next night, it was clearly much brighter than it had been that morning. ... It's an interesting opportunity to go out and see an unusual member of the solar system."

"I've never seen anything like it! It almost looks like a planet," says Eric Allen who recorded this view through a 16-inch telescope at the Observatoire du Cégep de Trois-Rivières in Quebec. The comet has no tail, a remarkable golden color, and yesterday it shocked astronomers with a spectacular eruption, brightening almost a million-fold from 17th to 2.5th magnitude in a matter of hours.

"This is unbelievable!" says Iranian astronomer Babak Tafreshi.

Oct. 25, 2007

A PERFECT SPHERICAL SHAPE



Oct. 26, 2007

A PERFECT SPHERICAL SHAPE



Oct. 27, 2007

A PERFECT SPHERICAL SHAPE



Nov. 11, 2007

Still the spherically shaped coma is attached to the comet, in full defiance of solar radiation pressure, solar wind blasts, solar gravitational forces:



From Oct. 23 to Nov. 11, for eighteen days, the comet's coma has a spherical shape.

There is also no indication that it has confounded anyone.
Comet Holmes 17P has made international headlines with an energetic outburst that has left astronomers speechless. The website skyandtelescope.com has called it "the weirdest new object to appear in the sky in memory." "For no apparent reason," the comet began to increase in luminosity, rapidly brightening from 17th magnitude to about 2.5 -- approximately a million-fold increase in brightness.

Are you incapable of comprehending English?
No where in that does it indicate they are confounded.

Surprised is not the same as confounded.

A PERFECT SPHERICAL SHAPE

If you think that is perfectly spherical you clearly have no idea what either spherical means or perfect means.
It has already been shown that one is quite clearly not a perfect sphere.
The same applies to others to a lesser extent.

Quote from: fjr66 on June 02, 2018, 09:13:00 AM

There are three part of the comet: nucleus, coma, and tail. I dont understand what mechanism that makes a tail of comet follow the rest of the comet, when the comet just a small object that dont have significant gravity attraction.

It doesn't. The tail (actually tails) material is constantly ejected from the nucleus. Old tail particles are blown away and replaced by new tail particles.

There is no athmosphere in the space, so impossible for it to drag the comet tail. I mean why the tail just escape from the back, not from the front (I think it's violate Newton  second Law)?

There are sources of force other than atmosphere in space.

Quote from: Curiouser and Curiouser on June 02, 2018, 09:57:08 AM

Quote from: fjr66 on June 02, 2018, 09:13:00 AM

There are three part of the comet: nucleus, coma, and tail. I dont understand what mechanism that makes a tail of comet follow the rest of the comet, when the comet just a small object that dont have significant gravity attraction.

It doesn't. The tail (actually tails) material is constantly ejected from the nucleus. Old tail particles are blown away and replaced by new tail particles.

There is no athmosphere in the space, so impossible for it to drag the comet tail. I mean why the tail just escape from the back, not from the front (I think it's violate Newton  second Law)?

The tails are not dragged along behind but point roughly away from the sun.

Comets are renowned for their big beautiful tails that stretch across the sky. But what's in those things, anyway? And how can comets get multiple tails?

The "tails" are ejected unevenly from all around the nucleus and are driven away from the sun by solar radiation and the solar wind.

There is no athmosphere in the space, so impossible for it to drag the comet tail. I mean why the tail just escape from the back, not from the front (I think it's violate Newton  second Law)?

That depends upon what you mean by "atmosphere".
The pressure is quite low, but there are still particles there.
The main ones (at least away from the planets) are those forming the solar wind.
Particles (think helium nuclei and electrons) expelled from the sun, going outwards from the sun.
These interact with particles ejected from comets, and if the particles are small enough will result in them being pushed outwards from the comet away from the sun.
This also means the tail doesn't actually go to the back of the comet. Instead it is off to the side.

Quote from: fjr66 on June 02, 2018, 09:13:00 AM

There are three part of the comet: nucleus, coma, and tail. I dont understand what mechanism that makes a tail of comet follow the rest of the comet, when the comet just a small object that dont have significant gravity attraction.

It doesn't always follow it. Sometimes it leads it.  The tail is always pointing away from the sun.

Then according to Newton Law of inertia, when the tail leads the comet, it always leads except there is external force. 

Holmes' coma continued expanding until by mid-November of '07 it had become the largest object in the solar system, vastly larger than the Sun. The coma's diameter had grown from 28 thousand kilometers to 7 million km.
 
At the time of Holmes' extraordinary display, the comet was actually moving away from the Sun, and therefore cooling.

Among the common sense questions posed by the enigma: how does such a gravitationally minuscule body hold in place a uniform, spherical coma 7 million kilometers in diameter?

It doesn't "hold in place a uniform, spherical coma 7 million kilometers in diameter" but the "gravitationally minuscule body" and the "uniform, spherical coma 7 million kilometers in diameter" all simply keep moving on the same trajectory through space.

Then according to Newton Law of inertia, when the tail leads the comet, it always leads except there is external force.

No, according to Newton's law, unless there is an external force, there is no tail. Instead it would just be out-gassing with the gas flowing equally outwards in all directions.
The solar wind provides this external force which pushes the tiny particles away from the comment, creating a tail which points roughly away from the sun.
There is no violation of Newton's law's here.

Tail does not "follow" the comet.
When comet gets close enough to Sun the heat warms it up, solar wind and radiation blow gasses and dust off, and sunlight illuminates the stream.
The tail is not behind the comet, it points opposite from Sun.
When comet gets far enough into darker and colder areas it freezes again and there's no tail.

A comet tail—and coma—are features visible in comets when they are illuminated by the Sun and may become visible from Earth when a comet passes through the inner Solar System. As a comet approaches the inner Solar System, solar radiation causes the volatile materials within the comet to vaporize and stream out of the nucleus, carrying dust away with them. Separate tails are formed of dust and gases, becoming visible through different phenomena; the dust reflects sunlight directly and the gases glow from ionisation. Most comets are too faint to be visible without the aid of a telescope, but a few each decade become bright enough to be visible to the naked eye.


A comet's orbit showing the different directions of
the gas and dust tails as the comet passes the Sun

(more details at: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comet_tail)

Quote from: fjr66 on June 29, 2019, 04:39:02 AM

Then according to Newton Law of inertia, when the tail leads the comet, it always leads except there is external force.

No, according to Newton's law, unless there is an external force, there is no tail. Instead it would just be out-gassing with the gas flowing equally outwards in all directions.
The solar wind provides this external force which pushes the tiny particles away from the comment, creating a tail which points roughly away from the sun.
There is no violation of Newton's law's here.

But in many description throughout history, the tail never leads the comet. What makes the tail always left behind? Why the gas not burst in the front of the comet. It is like a fireball thrown in the air, so the air drag the fireball to make it have a tail.

Tail does not "follow" the comet.
When comet gets close enough to Sun the heat warms it up, solar wind and radiation blow gasses and dust off, and sunlight illuminates the stream.
The tail is not behind the comet, it points opposite from Sun.
When comet gets far enough into darker and colder areas it freezes again and there's no tail.

Quote

A comet tail—and coma—are features visible in comets when they are illuminated by the Sun and may become visible from Earth when a comet passes through the inner Solar System. As a comet approaches the inner Solar System, solar radiation causes the volatile materials within the comet to vaporize and stream out of the nucleus, carrying dust away with them. Separate tails are formed of dust and gases, becoming visible through different phenomena; the dust reflects sunlight directly and the gases glow from ionisation. Most comets are too faint to be visible without the aid of a telescope, but a few each decade become bright enough to be visible to the naked eye.


A comet's orbit showing the different directions of
the gas and dust tails as the comet passes the Sun

(more details at: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comet_tail)

So when leaving the sun, the tail leads the comet?

But in many description throughout history, the tail never leads the comet. What makes the tail always left behind? Why the gas not burst in the front of the comet. It is like a fireball thrown in the air, so the air drag the fireball to make it have a tail.

Why just repeat effectively the same assertion?
Why completely ignore what has been said and ask a question which has already been addressed?
The tail doesn't trail the comment. It isn't left behind. It is blown away by the solar wind.
You can think of the solar wind being like the air dragging the dust and gas to make it have a tail.

Quote from: JackBlack on June 29, 2019, 02:14:57 PM

Quote from: fjr66 on June 29, 2019, 04:39:02 AM

Then according to Newton Law of inertia, when the tail leads the comet, it always leads except there is external force.

No, according to Newton's law, unless there is an external force, there is no tail. Instead it would just be out-gassing with the gas flowing equally outwards in all directions.
The solar wind provides this external force which pushes the tiny particles away from the comet, creating a tail which points roughly away from the sun.
There is no violation of Newton's law's here.

But in many description throughout history, the tail never leads the comet. What makes the tail always left behind? Why the gas not burst in the front of the comet. It is like a fireball thrown in the air, so the air drag the fireball to make it have a tail.

The comet is not like a fireball but is more like a dirty ice-ball usually around a small rocky core and as the ice evaporates the heavier dust particles are driven by the solar wind and the lighter gas is ionised and driven by the radiation pressure of the sunlight.

Why do comets have tails?
Comets develop tails as they approach perihelion—the place in their orbits when they are closest to the Sun. The Sun’s heat vaporizes some of the comet's material, releasing dust particles that were trapped in the ice.

A combination of solar radiation pressure and solar wind blow away gas and dust from the comet’s nucleus, forming two separate tails: the ion tail and the dust tail.

The tails of Comet Hale-Bopp. Fred Espenak / NASA GSFC

There is no air where the comet is moving and as JackBlack says, the "solar wind provides this external force which pushes the tiny particles away from the comet.

No, according to Newton's law, unless there is an external force, there is no tail. Instead it would just be out-gassing with the gas flowing equally outwards in all directions.

But the gas that form the tail always appear behind the comet,  Not in all direction (at least that is how they depicted
comet throughout history).

The solar wind provides this external force which pushes the tiny particles away from the comment, creating a tail which points roughly away from the sun.
There is no violation of Newton's law's here.

Then when the comet leaving the sun to the outer part of solar system, it is lead by the tail. But I never seen the comet lead by its tail.

Quote from: fjr66 on June 30, 2019, 04:07:15 AM

Quote from: JackBlack on June 29, 2019, 02:14:57 PM

Quote from: fjr66 on June 29, 2019, 04:39:02 AM

Then according to Newton Law of inertia, when the tail leads the comet, it always leads except there is external force.

No, according to Newton's law, unless there is an external force, there is no tail. Instead it would just be out-gassing with the gas flowing equally outwards in all directions.
The solar wind provides this external force which pushes the tiny particles away from the comet, creating a tail which points roughly away from the sun.
There is no violation of Newton's law's here.

But in many description throughout history, the tail never leads the comet. What makes the tail always left behind? Why the gas not burst in the front of the comet. It is like a fireball thrown in the air, so the air drag the fireball to make it have a tail.

The comet is not like a fireball but is more like a dirty ice-ball usually around a small rocky core and as the ice evaporates the heavier dust particles are driven by the solar wind and the lighter gas is ionised and driven by the radiation pressure of the sunlight.

Quote from: Maria Temming

Why do comets have tails?
Comets develop tails as they approach perihelion—the place in their orbits when they are closest to the Sun. The Sun’s heat vaporizes some of the comet's material, releasing dust particles that were trapped in the ice.

A combination of solar radiation pressure and solar wind blow away gas and dust from the comet’s nucleus, forming two separate tails: the ion tail and the dust tail.

The tails of Comet Hale-Bopp. Fred Espenak / NASA GSFC

There is no air where the comet is moving and as JackBlack says, the "solar wind provides this external force which pushes the tiny particles away from the comet.

Then when the comet receding from the sun, the tail will leads it. But I never seen any comet like that. Is there any proof comet leads by its tail captured by satellite or others?

But the gas that form the tail always appear behind the comet,  Not in all direction (at least that is how they depicted
comet throughout history).

No they don't.
When depicted, you just see the comet and tail, with no indication of what direction it is moving.
As such, you cannot tell if it is in front of the comet, behind the comet, off to the side or something else.

Instead people will often use circular reasoning. They will assume the tail must be behind the comet, use that to determine what direction the comet is going, and use that to conclude the tail is behind the comet.

Then when the comet leaving the sun to the outer part of solar system, it is lead by the tail. But I never seen the comet lead by its tail.

And how have you determined what direction the tail is going relative to the comet?
There are already examples provided in this thread which show the tail points away from the sun:
Look at what happens when the comet is in the upper right portion of the screen near the end.

Quote from: Macarios on June 29, 2019, 03:27:41 PM

Tail does not "follow" the comet.
When comet gets close enough to Sun the heat warms it up, solar wind and radiation blow gasses and dust off, and sunlight illuminates the stream.
The tail is not behind the comet, it points opposite from Sun.
When comet gets far enough into darker and colder areas it freezes again and there's no tail.

Quote

A comet tail—and coma—are features visible in comets when they are illuminated by the Sun and may become visible from Earth when a comet passes through the inner Solar System. As a comet approaches the inner Solar System, solar radiation causes the volatile materials within the comet to vaporize and stream out of the nucleus, carrying dust away with them. Separate tails are formed of dust and gases, becoming visible through different phenomena; the dust reflects sunlight directly and the gases glow from ionisation. Most comets are too faint to be visible without the aid of a telescope, but a few each decade become bright enough to be visible to the naked eye.


A comet's orbit showing the different directions of
the gas and dust tails as the comet passes the Sun

(more details at: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comet_tail)

So when leaving the sun, the tail leads the comet?

Yes, the cloud of gasses and dust (the thing that people named "tail" in the ancient times) is "leading" the commet (gets blown in front of the comet).