[meteorite-list] The wonderful wizards of Osmium CHICXULUB I

From: Sterling K. Webb <sterling_k_webb_at_meteoritecentral.com>
Date: Thu, 10 Apr 2008 18:35:50 -0500
Message-ID: <013f01c89b63$9c8d1b60$8250e146_at_ATARIENGINE>

Hi, List,

    There's a little bit of "straw-manning" going on here
(caution: science journalism at work -- theirs not mine).
They say the accepted size estimate of the Chicxulub
impactor is 15 km to 19 km. That's wrong. The most
commonly accepted estimate is 10 km (although
some favor 12 or 13 km).

    Their size estimate is based on the idea that all the
osmium they found was ALL the osmium from the impactor.
I doubt that the transport mechanism from impactor to ocean
muck was 100% efficient.

    Two-thirds of the planet is ocean, one third land. If what
what they found in the muck was two-thirds of the osmium?
The impactor would be 5 km across instead of 4.4 km, not an
astounding increase.

    All we know from the Chicxulub crater is the kinetic
energy of the impact: not the size, not the speed, but the
product of the two: mass times ( speed squared ). The Bang
at Chicxulub was 100 TeraTons of TNT. (That's 500 Zetta-
Joules, zetta being 10^21), or 100,000,000 MegaTons of TNT!

    A 5 km impactor weighs 1/8th of what a 10 km impactor
of the same material would and so it would have to go 2.8
times faster when it hit (2.8 squared = 8). Interestingly,
while we know the energy well, estimates of velocity are
a little shy. Those that offer up big impactors keep the
speed down and those that talk of smaller impactors boost
the speed estimate appropriately.

    But if a 5 km stoney impactor did all that damage, we are
talking about velocities in the neighborhood of 35 to 45 km/sec.
A highly eccentric orbit is required to achieve those kinds of
encounter velocities with the Earth.

    The most recent theory (I like it) of where the Chicxuluber
came from is the breakup of the parent body of the Baptistina
family of asteroids about 160 million years ago (the biggest
survivor of which is 298 Baptistina).

    The high encounter velocity also encourages proponents
of the comet impact theory. True, the press release says:
"chemical traces of the impactors left behind in rocks...
suggest otherwise," but you can forget that. The "traces"
are of a carbonaceous chondrite, a likely composition for
a "comet," which is afterall just an asteroid with extra frosting.



Sterling K. Webb
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
----- Original Message -----
From: "Darren Garrison" <cynapse at charter.net>
To: <Meteorite-list at meteoritecentral.com>
Sent: Thursday, April 10, 2008 4:52 PM
Subject: [meteorite-list] The wonderful wizards of Osmium


http://space.newscientist.com/article/dn13649-ocean-mud-yields-secrets-of-past-earth-impacts.html

Ocean mud yields secrets of past Earth impacts
20:28 10 April 2008
NewScientist.com news service
David Shiga

Mud at the bottom of the ocean holds precious clues about asteroids that
struck
Earth in the past, a new study reveals.

Scientists would love to have a better record of asteroid and comet impacts
to
understand how these catastrophic events have affected life and Earth's
climate.
But most impactors that made it through the atmosphere either gouged out a
crater that was subsequently erased or splashed into the ocean.
Now, scientists have developed a new tool to uncover these events, based on
concentrations of the metal osmium found in mud at the bottom of the ocean.
The
technique was developed by Fran?ois Paquay of the University of Hawaii in
Honolulu, US, and his colleagues.

Osmium atoms come in two varieties, or isotopes, one of which is slightly
heavier than the other. Crucially, the osmium in meteorites is much richer
in
the lighter form than the stuff native to Earth. As a result, scientists can
determine how much of the otherworldly stuff is present in any given deposit
of
the metal they find.

Paquay's team has been looking for the metal in samples of ocean sediment
obtained by drilling into the ocean floor. The sediment was laid down in
layers
over time, allowing scientists to date when they were deposited.

Multiple strikes
In 1995, members of Paquay's team pointed out high levels of the lighter
osmium
isotope - associated with extraterrestrial material - in ocean sediment laid
down around the time of the impact that killed off the dinosaurs 65 million
years ago.

Since then, they have found another big spike in extraterrestrial osmium
laid
down at the time of another known impact event that happened 35 million
years
ago. At that time, multiple impacts shook the Earth in what is known as the
Late
Eocene impacts.

The team estimates that 80,000 tonnes of osmium from the object that wiped
out
the dinosaurs was vaporised by the heat of the impact. It then dissolved
into
seawater and eventually accumulated on the ocean floor. The Late Eocene
impacts
35 million years ago laid down an estimated 20,000 tonnes.

Smaller impacts
Based on these amounts, the team estimates that the dinosaur-killing object
was
4.1 to 4.4 kilometres across, while the largest of the Late Eocene impactors
would have been 2.8 to 3 km across.

These are much lower than previous estimates based on the size of the
craters
associated with these events. These have given impactor size estimates of 15
to
19 km for the one that killed off the dinosaurs, and 8 km for the larger of
two
impactors involved in the Late Eocene impacts.

What accounts for the difference? For one thing, the calculations by
Paquay's
team assume that 100% of the osmium from the impactors was vaporised and
dissolved into seawater. If a smaller percentage actually ended up on the
ocean
floor, then the impactors could have been bigger.

Comet impacts?
But even after taking this into account, Paquay thinks the impactors were
smaller than the crater-based calculations suggest. If the impactors were as
large as these calculations imply, then 90% of the osmium from the impactors
is
hiding somewhere other than in ocean sediment. "We think that this is
unlikely,
but we can't rule this possibility out without additional work," he says.

Another possibility is that the impacting objects were comets rather than
asteroids, and contained much less osmium to begin with. But chemical traces
of
the impactors left behind in rocks and reported in previous studies suggest
otherwise.

Kenneth Farley of Caltech in Pasadena, US, who has studied other traces of
impacts in sediment, but is not a member of Paquay's team, is impressed with
the
new method.

"I am hoping that this technique will allow the detection of previously
unknown
impacts so we can get a better handle on impact frequency and assess
whether -
and how - impacts affect life and climate," he told New Scientist.

Unique signature
Although impacts are also known to contribute unusually large amounts of an
element called iridium to sediment, the iridium concentrations are much
harder
to translate into impactor sizes, Farley says.

Unlike osmium, extraterrestrial iridium does not have a unique isotope
signature, so is harder to distinguish from iridium native to Earth.

And while samples show osmium is laid down evenly across the planet, the
distribution of iridium is very patchy, making it hard to draw conclusions
without a large number of samples from different parts of the planet.


______________________________________________
http://www.meteoritecentral.com
Meteorite-list mailing list
Meteorite-list at meteoritecentral.com
http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
Received on Thu 10 Apr 2008 07:35:50 PM PDT