[meteorite-list] Iranian Fireball Was Of Geophysical Origin
From: MexicoDoug_at_aol.com <MexicoDoug_at_meteoritecentral.com>
Date: Thu Apr 22 10:31:22 2004 Message-ID: <c0.5202343.2d5e5171_at_aol.com> --part1_c0.5202343.2d5e5171_boundary Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable This topic was discussed a few weeks ago on the list, and it seems pretty=20 convincing that Earth parented meteorites are elusive for good scientific=20 reasoning - it seems that if conditions to produce them happened, that the m= aterial=20 would be glass or a split planet Earth (a la did the moon come from Earth=20 question we had recently).=A0=20 While it may be possible (though statistically highly improbable), it is=20 important not to say it is "a bit of a stretch", "just like we have Martian=20 meteorites here". Those statements taken together are misleading, to say the least. It is important to recognize that Earth and Mars are so different regarding=20 atmospheric density (over 100X) / viscosity and to a much lesser degree=20 gravity, that such an analogy is not based on astronomy and physics, but rat= her=20 wishful thinking, with a general ignoring of scientific principles - i.e. a=20 solution (Earth parented meteorites exist because I can think it and there a= re=20 Martian meteorites here) looking for a problem (Why no one has ever confirme= d an=20 Earth parented meteorite). Extending that logic, I would ask where the Solar parented meteorites are at= ,=20 and while we are at it the Jovian parented=A0 and Venusian parented meteorit= es=20 as well.=A0 The conditions on Mars simply do not lend themselves for compari= son=20 to Earth.=A0 Venus is a better comparison for Earth.=A0 Perhaps someone coul= d work=20 out the physics to show what sort of impactor on Earth is capable of causing= s=20 something besides glass and giving it escape velocity. Without doing the physics, it is clear it would have to be a kilometer plus=20 sized impactor imparting in an instant to a kilometer plus sized Earth rock=20 escape velocity plus frictional loss velocity, which further does not explod= e=20 with that velocity at sea level as it makes its way through the exponiential= ly=20 most dense part of the atmosphere (i.e. a "reverse meteorite") at a right or= =20 obtuse angle to the impact (which tends to create a velocity vector landing=20= back=20 on Earth).=A0 While this might sound "plausible", for an impactor to produce= a=20 kilometer plus sized rock with such a velocity seems nearly impossible, know= ing=20 the characteristics of Earth surface features. To actually achieve the above, either ground zero has to become liquid or=20 plasma eventually producing glasses, for which there is some evidence in=20 tektites, or Earth must be split like a nut, for which the Moon was presente= d as=20 evidence in such a hypothethised impact around 4.5 billion years ago.... So that would leave a scenario of a gigantic impactor hitting near the base=20 of a Mount Everest made of solid iron or other high tensile type structure,=20 incoming at a low entry angle, and propelling the peak into outer space. In the case of Mars objects over 10 meters (but probably in the realm 500 km= )=20 can impact whole much more readily and produce "reverse meteorites" with the= =20 initial velocities potentially conducive to this event which can escape more= =20 readily as gravity (and hence resulting escape velocities) is less than 40%=20 Earth's.=A0 Furthermore Mars is closer to the Asteroid belt and is expected=20= to have=20 more flux of such potential impacts. Saludos Doug Dawn Mexico En un mensaje con fecha 02/13/2004 8:21:52 AM Mexico Standard Time,=20 cviau_at_beld.net escribe: > and bit of a stretch.. but plausible:=A0 Just like we have > Martian meteorites here on earth, so would we not have some of the > ejecta from our terrestrial impacts also in orbit around the Sun --part1_c0.5202343.2d5e5171_boundary Content-Type: text/html; charset="ISO-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable <HTML><FONT FACE=3Darial,helvetica><HTML><FONT SIZE=3D2 PTSIZE=3D10 FAMILY= =3D"SANSSERIF" FACE=3D"Arial" LANG=3D"0">This topic was discussed a few week= s ago on the list, and it seems pretty convincing that Earth parented meteor= ites are elusive for good scientific reasoning - it seems that if conditions= to produce them happened, that the material would be glass or a split plane= t Earth (a la did the moon come from Earth question we had recently).=A0 <BR= > <BR> While it may be possible (though statistically highly improbable), it is imp= ortant not to say it is "a bit of a stretch", "just like we have Martian met= eorites here".<BR> <BR> Those statements taken together are misleading, to say the least.<BR> <BR> It is important to recognize that Earth and Mars are so different regarding=20= atmospheric density (over 100X) / viscosity and to a much lesser degree grav= ity, that such an analogy is not based on astronomy and physics, but rather=20= wishful thinking, with a general ignoring of scientific principles - i.e. a=20= solution (Earth parented meteorites exist because I can think it and there a= re Martian meteorites here) looking for a problem (Why no one has ever confi= rmed an Earth parented meteorite).<BR> <BR> Extending that logic, I would ask where the Solar parented meteorites are at= , and while we are at it the Jovian parented=A0 and Venusian parented meteor= ites as well.=A0 The conditions on Mars simply do not lend themselves for co= mparison to Earth.=A0 Venus is a better comparison for Earth.=A0 Perhaps som= eone could work out the physics to show what sort of impactor on Earth is ca= pable of causings something besides glass and giving it escape velocity.<BR> <BR> Without doing the physics, it is clear it would have to be a kilometer plus=20= sized impactor imparting in an instant to a kilometer plus sized Earth rock=20= escape velocity plus frictional loss velocity, which further does not explod= e with that velocity at sea level as it makes its way through the exponienti= ally most dense part of the atmosphere (i.e. a "reverse meteorite") at a rig= ht or obtuse angle to the impact (which tends to create a velocity vector la= nding back on Earth).=A0 While this might sound "plausible", for an impactor= to produce a kilometer plus sized rock with such a velocity seems nearly im= possible, knowing the characteristics of Earth surface features.<BR> <BR> To actually achieve the above, either ground zero has to become liquid or pl= asma eventually producing glasses, for which there is some evidence in tekti= tes, or Earth must be split like a nut, for which the Moon was presented as=20= evidence in such a hypothethised impact around 4.5 billion years ago....<BR> <BR> So that would leave a scenario of a gigantic impactor hitting near the base=20= of a Mount Everest made of solid iron or other high tensile type structure,=20= incoming at a low entry angle, and propelling the peak into outer space.<BR> <BR> In the case of Mars objects over 10 meters (but probably in the realm 500 km= ) can impact whole much more readily and produce "reverse meteorites" with t= he initial velocities potentially conducive to this event which can escape m= ore readily as gravity (and hence resulting escape velocities) is less than=20= 40% Earth's.=A0 Furthermore Mars is closer to the Asteroid belt and is expec= ted to have more flux of such potential impacts.<BR> <BR> Saludos<BR> Doug Dawn<BR> Mexico<BR> <BR> En un mensaje con fecha 02/13/2004 8:21:52 AM Mexico Standard Time, cviau_at_be= ld.net escribe:<BR> <BR> <BLOCKQUOTE TYPE=3DCITE style=3D"BORDER-LEFT: #0000ff 2px solid; MARGIN-LEFT= : 5px; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px">and bit of a stretch.. but plau= sible:=A0 Just like we have<BR> Martian meteorites here on earth, so would we not have some of the<BR> ejecta from our terrestrial impacts also in orbit around the Sun</BLOCKQUOTE= ><BR> </FONT></HTML> --part1_c0.5202343.2d5e5171_boundary-- Received on Fri 13 Feb 2004 11:12:33 AM PST |
StumbleUpon del.icio.us Yahoo MyWeb |