Well, I guess we can discard method 1 and 3, so that leaves method 2.

Maybe you should quote a little more from the paper where it is said that the production of hydroxyl is thought to be different. I am sure they give examples. And actually I would be surprised that OH has not been observed in other planets.

And then what are you getting at? Because first there is the whole discussion of hydroxyl (OH) and then there is the discussion about ozone (O₃), so, you might want to clear things up.

However, my expectations lead me to believe that this will turn into an "electric Venus" thread.

__________________
************************************************** *************************
Optimism does not change the laws of physics. (T'Pol)
A good scientist has freed himself of concepts and keeps his mind open to what is. (Dao De Jing 27)
************************************************** *************************
Martin ( http://www.geocities.com/DrMartinV )

Thats what I was thinking, u get to recognise the signs.

__________________
'The eye can only see what the mind is prepared to accept'

You mean an EU proponent would take things out of context and only quote the parts of the paper that would make it look like the paper supports their ideas? I'm shocked, shocked, I tell you. (with apologies to Captain Renault).

__________________
Some try to tell me, thoughts they cannot defend,... - Moody Blues.

Well, that and the conflating of Hydroxyl and Ozone shows he hasn't realy read what he is reading, he just sees the standard EU trigger words and quotes them.

__________________
'The eye can only see what the mind is prepared to accept'

So I'm not the only one to notice the sudden switch from Hydroxyl to ozone? And it's related to Electric Universe?

(in Oz we're quite concerned with Ozone - we've a slight concern with skin cancers & the like because of a nearby lack of the stuff - so i noticed the switch)

__________________
* Never doubt there is Truth; just doubt that you have it!

Okay, working on VEX data myself, I looked for the original source, which is on UniverseToday, as IoNsmasher said, and the link is here.

So, basically the idea is that OH works are a free radical cleanser, maybe it would work in our body too! And it seems that there is a good correlation between the abundance of ozone and hydroxil. Apparently, according to the original ESA press release, I was wrong in assuming that OH would have been observed at other planets, it really seems to be elusive. Well, you learn something every day.

So, just like in any press release, there are statements that drop from the sky, never to be told anything about it further, and thus useless for the press release. Indeed, ESA writes:

And then as reader you are hanging there, thinking: Yeah, and ... so ... ?
That is why I hate press releases, because there is no mention at all how the OH is formed on Earth, Venus or Mars, so, why put this in?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!

But for the most, it is only said that there is a link between the amount of OH and of O₃, and that the measurment of the amount of OH (which they can do now with VIRTIS) will allow the team to make estimates for the amount of O₃.

So, in both stories, there is NO mention whatsoever, about the creation of ozone.

I wonder if ESA will do a press release on my paper about Venus (I doubt it, it is about some weird (okay mirror mode) wave in the magnetosheath).

__________________
************************************************** *************************
Optimism does not change the laws of physics. (T'Pol)
A good scientist has freed himself of concepts and keeps his mind open to what is. (Dao De Jing 27)
************************************************** *************************
Martin ( http://www.geocities.com/DrMartinV )

Well, and that the probes sent to Halley's Comet in '86 pretty well confirmed it. Do you have an opinion about those probes?

__________________
Gillian

"Now everyone was giving her that kind of look UFOlogists get when they suddenly say, 'Hey, if you shade your eyes you can see it is just a flock of geese after all.'"

"You can't erase icing."

"I can't believe it doesn't work! I found it on the internet, man!"

Yes, it is a component of cometary spectra, because water comes from the nucleus and gets dissociated either by solar UV light or by impact with solar wind particles. Here is an ApJ paper discussing the OH at comet Hale-Bopp.

So, let's keep on track here now, IoNsmasher, we are not discussing comets here, we are discussing Venus and OH and ozone. Please, even though it is your thread, stay to the original topic, you have a lot of confusion to clear up, generated by your OP (opening post).

Questions:
- What do you think the difference is between OH creation at comets and at Venus?
- How do you come up with the ozone creation, suddenly, when there is only a link between the amount of ozone and the amount of hydroxyl (or did you just mistakenly take them to be the same stuff?)

Interestingly, I found that there is suddenly another post by you, which I have not seen before. (maybe because of the monitoring of new members?).

Okay, so there is another way of creating OH from water H₂O and excited NO₂ (I have no idea why they say "electronically exited", but okay). So, that is interesting that they found this reaction. (Ah, I get it, this is a molecule, so it can also vibrationally excited.)

Well, we sort of knew that already, reading the link that you gave yourself, which says:

So, what exactly is your point and what is the ATM claim that you are making here?

__________________
************************************************** *************************
Optimism does not change the laws of physics. (T'Pol)
A good scientist has freed himself of concepts and keeps his mind open to what is. (Dao De Jing 27)
************************************************** *************************
Martin ( http://www.geocities.com/DrMartinV )

Google and ADS are your friends, IoNsmasher, but still. Ozone has not been observed in cometary tails.

Read the Barabash et al. paper in Nature for all the interesting details of the loss of water through the tail of Venus in the ratio of 2 H for each O (Nature, Vol 450|29 November 2007| doi:10.1038/nature06434, pfd available from me if necessary)

Most likely through chemical reactions. There is even a paper on the topinc, but it will do you no good I think.

I doubt you don't understand what ATM is (my idea is you have been here before), and depending on what you actually want with this thread, I guess we can safely keep it here in ATM. And the singular is forum (or maybe not for Americans, because they say 1 visa.)

__________________
************************************************** *************************
Optimism does not change the laws of physics. (T'Pol)
A good scientist has freed himself of concepts and keeps his mind open to what is. (Dao De Jing 27)
************************************************** *************************
Martin ( http://www.geocities.com/DrMartinV )

In the US, it's still one forum and two (or more, of course!) fora.

__________________
Gillian

"Now everyone was giving her that kind of look UFOlogists get when they suddenly say, 'Hey, if you shade your eyes you can see it is just a flock of geese after all.'"

"You can't erase icing."

"I can't believe it doesn't work! I found it on the internet, man!"

"Forums" is actually the preferred plural, at least in US English.

cite

cite

cite

Nick

__________________
Nick Theodorakis

That gets into "preferred" vs. "correct," an argument I'm bound to lose. Still, some of us man the battlements for "fora," or even "datum."

__________________
Gillian

"Now everyone was giving her that kind of look UFOlogists get when they suddenly say, 'Hey, if you shade your eyes you can see it is just a flock of geese after all.'"

"You can't erase icing."

"I can't believe it doesn't work! I found it on the internet, man!"