Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss
Re: Coincidence of meteor strike and close asteroid approach at same time.
152 views
Skip to first unread message
Robert Clark
Feb 28, 2013, 2:38:31 PM2/28/13
to
On Feb 27, 1:33 pm, j...@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote:
> In sci.physics Robert Clark <rgregorycl...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> > That video I linked to previously and ones like it may also be able
> > to address this question:
>
> > An Asteroid's Parting Shot.
> > By Phil Plait
> > Posted Tuesday, Feb. 19, 2013, at 8:00 AM
> >http://www.slate.com/blogs/bad_astronomy/2013/02/19/near_earth_astero...
>
> > The video shows 2012 DA14 slowing moving through the frame, and
> > meteors and artificial satellites streaking rapidly through the frame.
> > Assuming we are able to distinguish the satellites, perhaps by
> > knowing already their positions, perhaps we can determine if the
> > number of meteors shown here are higher than normal.
> > Better would be longer exposures that include at least the time
> > period of the Russian meteor impact.
>
> > Bob Clark
>
> While people here have been speculating all sorts of nonsense, astronomers
> from the University of Antioquia in Medellin, Colombia have figured out
> where the Russian meteor came from and that it has no relationship to
> the other close passing asteroid.
>
> http://www.space.com/19974-russian-meteor-explosion-origin-size.html
The Fireballs of February.
Feb. 22, 2012
...
"They all hail from the asteroid belt—but not from a single location
in the asteroid belt," he says. "There is no common source for these
fireballs, which is puzzling."
"This isn't the first time sky watchers have noticed odd fireballs in
February. In fact, the "Fireballs of February" are a bit of a legend
in meteor circles.
"Brown explains: "Back in the 1960s and 70s, amateur astronomers
noticed an increase in the number of bright, sound-producing deep-
penetrating fireballs during the month of February. The numbers seemed
significant, especially when you consider that there are few people
outside at night in winter. Follow-up studies in the late 1980s
suggested no big increase in the rate of February fireballs.
Nevertheless, we've always wondered if something was going on."
"Indeed, a 1990 study by astronomer Ian Holliday suggests that the
'February Fireballs' are real. He analyzed photographic records of
about a thousand fireballs from the 1970s and 80s and found evidence
for a fireball stream intersecting Earth's orbit in February. He also
found signs of fireball streams in late summer and fall. The results
are controversial, however. Even Halliday recognized some big
statistical uncertainties in his results."
...
http://science.nasa.gov/science-news/science-at-nasa/2012/22feb_februaryfireballs/
Note this was from last year, not this year in regard to this
February's unusual meteor and asteroid encounters. But what's key is
the article notes this has been noticed in other February's.
The article suggests greater number of fireballs in February. It also
mentions they are typically slow, long-lasting, and penetrate deep in
the atmosphere. I don't know about the slow part, but the long-lasting
and deep penetration aspects could be due to larger meteors during
February's.
If there is an association with the 2012 DA14 asteroid, then since
it has approximately a year long orbit, this could explain why the
fireballs are seen frequently in February. Note it was discovered
last year in February also during a close approach.
Also notable as Steve Willner mentioned the two orbital crossings
could result in rather close approaches on the second crossing as
well:
On Feb 26, 1:56 pm, will...@cfa.harvard.edu (Steve Willner) wrote:
> ...
>
> > Does this mean there are two close approaches per orbit? It doesn't
> > necessarily have to be since where the two orbits "cross" does not
> > mean the two bodies have to be there at the same time.
>
> Yes, exactly. Typically one body will be far away when the other is
> near a crossing point.
>
> > if they are close at one "crossing" point, they should be
> > relatively close at the other.
>
> About half a day away at the next crossing point, given the period of
> 366.24 days. That's about 400 Earth radii if I've done the
> arithmetic right. The distance is cumulative, so a simple estimate
> is that it will take another 366 years (365 orbits for the asteroid)
> before there's another close approach. However, the recent Earth
> encounter must have changed the orbit, so the simple estimate is
> probably wrong. There are also likely to be non-gravitational
> effects. This object is probably not one to worry about in the near
> term, but this sort of rough estimate is no substitute for a proper
> orbit calculation.
>
This could explain the observation of Halliday that there seems to be
a statistical increase also in late Summer and Fall.
In any case, the Air Force needs to release its satellite detections
of these fireballs. For one thing they might be able to detect the
meteors before they have any appreciable interaction with the
atmosphere. For large meteors, of oblong shape, the atmospheric
interaction could alter their direction, thus giving a misleading
interpretation of their original orbits.
For many people the Air Force not sharing all the technical means at
its disposal led to the loss of the shuttle Columbia crew. It must not
be said that its keeping its meteor detections capability secret led
to the loss of an entire city.
Bob Clark
> In sci.physics Robert Clark <rgregorycl...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> > That video I linked to previously and ones like it may also be able
> > to address this question:
>
> > An Asteroid's Parting Shot.
> > By Phil Plait
> > Posted Tuesday, Feb. 19, 2013, at 8:00 AM
> >http://www.slate.com/blogs/bad_astronomy/2013/02/19/near_earth_astero...
>
> > The video shows 2012 DA14 slowing moving through the frame, and
> > meteors and artificial satellites streaking rapidly through the frame.
> > Assuming we are able to distinguish the satellites, perhaps by
> > knowing already their positions, perhaps we can determine if the
> > number of meteors shown here are higher than normal.
> > Better would be longer exposures that include at least the time
> > period of the Russian meteor impact.
>
> > Bob Clark
>
> While people here have been speculating all sorts of nonsense, astronomers
> from the University of Antioquia in Medellin, Colombia have figured out
> where the Russian meteor came from and that it has no relationship to
> the other close passing asteroid.
>
> http://www.space.com/19974-russian-meteor-explosion-origin-size.html
The Fireballs of February.
Feb. 22, 2012
...
"They all hail from the asteroid belt—but not from a single location
in the asteroid belt," he says. "There is no common source for these
fireballs, which is puzzling."
"This isn't the first time sky watchers have noticed odd fireballs in
February. In fact, the "Fireballs of February" are a bit of a legend
in meteor circles.
"Brown explains: "Back in the 1960s and 70s, amateur astronomers
noticed an increase in the number of bright, sound-producing deep-
penetrating fireballs during the month of February. The numbers seemed
significant, especially when you consider that there are few people
outside at night in winter. Follow-up studies in the late 1980s
suggested no big increase in the rate of February fireballs.
Nevertheless, we've always wondered if something was going on."
"Indeed, a 1990 study by astronomer Ian Holliday suggests that the
'February Fireballs' are real. He analyzed photographic records of
about a thousand fireballs from the 1970s and 80s and found evidence
for a fireball stream intersecting Earth's orbit in February. He also
found signs of fireball streams in late summer and fall. The results
are controversial, however. Even Halliday recognized some big
statistical uncertainties in his results."
...
http://science.nasa.gov/science-news/science-at-nasa/2012/22feb_februaryfireballs/
Note this was from last year, not this year in regard to this
February's unusual meteor and asteroid encounters. But what's key is
the article notes this has been noticed in other February's.
The article suggests greater number of fireballs in February. It also
mentions they are typically slow, long-lasting, and penetrate deep in
the atmosphere. I don't know about the slow part, but the long-lasting
and deep penetration aspects could be due to larger meteors during
February's.
If there is an association with the 2012 DA14 asteroid, then since
it has approximately a year long orbit, this could explain why the
fireballs are seen frequently in February. Note it was discovered
last year in February also during a close approach.
Also notable as Steve Willner mentioned the two orbital crossings
could result in rather close approaches on the second crossing as
well:
On Feb 26, 1:56 pm, will...@cfa.harvard.edu (Steve Willner) wrote:
> ...
>
> > Does this mean there are two close approaches per orbit? It doesn't
> > necessarily have to be since where the two orbits "cross" does not
> > mean the two bodies have to be there at the same time.
>
> Yes, exactly. Typically one body will be far away when the other is
> near a crossing point.
>
> > if they are close at one "crossing" point, they should be
> > relatively close at the other.
>
> About half a day away at the next crossing point, given the period of
> 366.24 days. That's about 400 Earth radii if I've done the
> arithmetic right. The distance is cumulative, so a simple estimate
> is that it will take another 366 years (365 orbits for the asteroid)
> before there's another close approach. However, the recent Earth
> encounter must have changed the orbit, so the simple estimate is
> probably wrong. There are also likely to be non-gravitational
> effects. This object is probably not one to worry about in the near
> term, but this sort of rough estimate is no substitute for a proper
> orbit calculation.
>
This could explain the observation of Halliday that there seems to be
a statistical increase also in late Summer and Fall.
In any case, the Air Force needs to release its satellite detections
of these fireballs. For one thing they might be able to detect the
meteors before they have any appreciable interaction with the
atmosphere. For large meteors, of oblong shape, the atmospheric
interaction could alter their direction, thus giving a misleading
interpretation of their original orbits.
For many people the Air Force not sharing all the technical means at
its disposal led to the loss of the shuttle Columbia crew. It must not
be said that its keeping its meteor detections capability secret led
to the loss of an entire city.
Bob Clark
Brad Guth
Feb 28, 2013, 2:43:45 PM2/28/13
to
Robert Clark
Feb 28, 2013, 2:44:17 PM2/28/13
to
> One analysis of the actual orbit of the Chelyabinsk object is athttp://arxiv.org/abs/1302.5377
> I don't know whether the analysis is correct or not, but at least the
> authors explain their methods and assumptions. I expect a similar
> analysis combining the camera and infrasound data should do much
> better.
>
> --
Even more so if the Air Force shared its satellite meteor detection
data.
Bob Clark
> I don't know whether the analysis is correct or not, but at least the
> authors explain their methods and assumptions. I expect a similar
> analysis combining the camera and infrasound data should do much
> better.
>
> --
Even more so if the Air Force shared its satellite meteor detection
data.
Bob Clark
Brad Guth
Feb 28, 2013, 2:47:48 PM2/28/13
to
stack of potentially lethal items encountering Earth.
Davoud
Feb 28, 2013, 3:21:53 PM2/28/13
to
Robert Clark:
Columbia, it's not true. Can you imagine how many hours or days in
advance the AF would have to have known a meteor was going to collide
with the Columbia!? Not possible. The Air Force has no "meteor
detections capability," secret or otherwise, because the AF is not in
the business of detecting meteors, even if it does so inadvertently
from time to time. The AF does not operate the U.S. space
reconnaissance program.
By that token, if a meteor destroys a whole city it won't be the fault
of the Air Force except in deranged minds. For each nutter who blamed
the Air Force for not detecting a meteor there would be two other
nutters who blamed the AF for not shooting down a UFO.
We mustn't let conspiracy theorists and other nut cases run our science.
--
I agree with almost everything that you have said and almost everything that
you will say in your entire life.
usenet *at* davidillig dawt cawm
> For many people the Air Force not sharing all the technical means at
> its disposal led to the loss of the shuttle Columbia crew. It must not
> be said that its keeping its meteor detections capability secret led
> to the loss of an entire city.
It doesn't matter how many people believe some nonsense about the
> its disposal led to the loss of the shuttle Columbia crew. It must not
> be said that its keeping its meteor detections capability secret led
> to the loss of an entire city.
Columbia, it's not true. Can you imagine how many hours or days in
advance the AF would have to have known a meteor was going to collide
with the Columbia!? Not possible. The Air Force has no "meteor
detections capability," secret or otherwise, because the AF is not in
the business of detecting meteors, even if it does so inadvertently
from time to time. The AF does not operate the U.S. space
reconnaissance program.
By that token, if a meteor destroys a whole city it won't be the fault
of the Air Force except in deranged minds. For each nutter who blamed
the Air Force for not detecting a meteor there would be two other
nutters who blamed the AF for not shooting down a UFO.
We mustn't let conspiracy theorists and other nut cases run our science.
--
I agree with almost everything that you have said and almost everything that
you will say in your entire life.
usenet *at* davidillig dawt cawm
Robert Clark
Feb 28, 2013, 4:07:38 PM2/28/13
to
On Feb 28, 3:21 pm, Davoud <s...@sky.net> wrote:
> Robert Clark:
>
> > For many people the Air Force not sharing all the technical means at
> > its disposal led to the loss of the shuttle Columbia crew. It must not
> > be said that its keeping its meteor detections capability secret led
> > to the loss of an entire city.
>
> It doesn't matter how many people believe some nonsense about the
> Columbia, it's not true. Can you imagine how many hours or days in
> advance the AF would have to have known a meteor was going to collide
> with the Columbia!? Not possible. The Air Force has no "meteor
> detections capability," secret or otherwise, because the AF is not in
> the business of detecting meteors, even if it does so inadvertently
> from time to time. The AF does not operate the U.S. space
> reconnaissance program.
>
> By that token, if a meteor destroys a whole city it won't be the fault
> of the Air Force except in deranged minds. For each nutter who blamed
> the Air Force for not detecting a meteor there would be two other
> nutters who blamed the AF for not shooting down a UFO.
>
> We mustn't let conspiracy theorists and other nut cases run our science.
>
> --
Needless to say, the implication was not that Columbia was destroyed
> Robert Clark:
>
> > For many people the Air Force not sharing all the technical means at
> > its disposal led to the loss of the shuttle Columbia crew. It must not
> > be said that its keeping its meteor detections capability secret led
> > to the loss of an entire city.
>
> It doesn't matter how many people believe some nonsense about the
> Columbia, it's not true. Can you imagine how many hours or days in
> advance the AF would have to have known a meteor was going to collide
> with the Columbia!? Not possible. The Air Force has no "meteor
> detections capability," secret or otherwise, because the AF is not in
> the business of detecting meteors, even if it does so inadvertently
> from time to time. The AF does not operate the U.S. space
> reconnaissance program.
>
> By that token, if a meteor destroys a whole city it won't be the fault
> of the Air Force except in deranged minds. For each nutter who blamed
> the Air Force for not detecting a meteor there would be two other
> nutters who blamed the AF for not shooting down a UFO.
>
> We mustn't let conspiracy theorists and other nut cases run our science.
>
> --
by a meteor, but that the Air Force's various imaging and detection
capabilities were not shared before Columbia attempted re-entry.
In regards to the Air Force having meteor detection capability the
Air Force has acknowledged this.
Bob Clark
On Feb 23, 6:09 pm, Robert Clark <rgregorycl...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>...
>
> Meteor expert Clark Chapman and former astronaut Rusty Schweickart
> urge U.S. military to re-initiate sharing of satellite detections of
> meteor impacts:
>
> Russian Meteor Fallout: Military Satellite Data Should Be Shared.
> by Leonard David, SPACE.com’s Space Insider Columnist
> Date: 18 February 2013 Time: 09:03 AM EThttp://www.space.com/19846-russian-meteor-fallout-military-satellites...
>
> From links in the article, the military formerly did share this
> information but the policy was changed in 2009. This is important
> because the satellites reportedly have the capability to detect
> meteors down to 1 meter wide and below. This would well have the
> capability to determine if close asteroid flybys result in increased
> meteor impacts.
>
> Bob Clark
Chris L Peterson
Feb 28, 2013, 5:54:55 PM2/28/13
to
On Thu, 28 Feb 2013 15:21:53 -0500, Davoud <st...@sky.net> wrote:
>The Air Force has no "meteor
>detections capability," secret or otherwise, because the AF is not in
>the business of detecting meteors, even if it does so inadvertently
>from time to time.
Actually, the military has superior meteor detecting capability. The
>The Air Force has no "meteor
>detections capability," secret or otherwise, because the AF is not in
>the business of detecting meteors, even if it does so inadvertently
>from time to time.
DOD satellites that continuously monitor the Earth looking for covert
nuclear explosions provide some of the best data available on meteors.
Unfortunately, this data is only shared with the academic community on
rare occasions.
What the military doesn't have (and doesn't much need) is the
capability of detecting meteoroids. The only practical way of
detecting those is optically, and while most are too small for current
technology, the most likely detectors of meteoroids are non-military
sky surveys.
Greg (Strider) Moore
Feb 28, 2013, 5:55:14 PM2/28/13
to
"Robert Clark" wrote in message
news:ee2bd649-a99d-4b19...@y4g2000yqa.googlegroups.com...
The Air Force would have gladly shared the data had it been asked for. They
had done so in the past when asked.
> It must not
>be said that its keeping its meteor detections capability secret led
>to the loss of an entire city.
>
> Bob Clark
>
>
--
Greg D. Moore http://greenmountainsoftware.wordpress.com/
CEO QuiCR: Quick, Crowdsourced Responses. http://www.quicr.net
news:ee2bd649-a99d-4b19...@y4g2000yqa.googlegroups.com...
>
>
> For many people the Air Force not sharing all the technical means at
>its disposal led to the loss of the shuttle Columbia crew.
In what reality?
>
> For many people the Air Force not sharing all the technical means at
>its disposal led to the loss of the shuttle Columbia crew.
The Air Force would have gladly shared the data had it been asked for. They
had done so in the past when asked.
> It must not
>be said that its keeping its meteor detections capability secret led
>to the loss of an entire city.
>
> Bob Clark
>
>
Greg D. Moore http://greenmountainsoftware.wordpress.com/
CEO QuiCR: Quick, Crowdsourced Responses. http://www.quicr.net
Davoud
Feb 28, 2013, 10:27:40 PM2/28/13
to
Davoud:
> >The Air Force has no "meteor
> >detections capability," secret or otherwise, because the AF is not in
> >the business of detecting meteors, even if it does so inadvertently
> >from time to time.
Chris L Peterson:
> >detections capability," secret or otherwise, because the AF is not in
> >the business of detecting meteors, even if it does so inadvertently
> >from time to time.
> Actually, the military has superior meteor detecting capability. The
> DOD satellites that continuously monitor the Earth looking for covert
> nuclear explosions provide some of the best data available on meteors.
So it's like I said, the AF is not in the business of detecting
> DOD satellites that continuously monitor the Earth looking for covert
> nuclear explosions provide some of the best data available on meteors.
meteors, even if it does so inadvertently from time to time.
Brad Guth
Mar 2, 2013, 1:10:42 PM3/2/13
to
50 Mt nuke from Russia or any other nation.
Chris L Peterson
Mar 2, 2013, 1:23:52 PM3/2/13
to
On Sat, 2 Mar 2013 10:10:42 -0800 (PST), Brad Guth
<brad...@gmail.com> wrote:
>In other words, our USAF isn't in the business of tracking an incoming
>50 Mt nuke from Russia or any other nation.
Meteors are atmospheric phenomena, lasting a few seconds. The Air
<brad...@gmail.com> wrote:
>In other words, our USAF isn't in the business of tracking an incoming
>50 Mt nuke from Russia or any other nation.
Force can and does record such events (inadvertently, as Davoud
pointed out) while monitoring for nuclear blasts and rocket launches.
What the Air Force does not currently do (because they have little
reason) is to monitor space for asteroids or meteoroids in Earth
intersecting orbits. That is a task best left to civilian agencies and
amateur astronomers, and the ability to detect smaller and smaller
objects is steadily improving.
The Air Force does monitor bodies in Earth orbit (using radar) because
those are the things most likely (by far) to damage space assets, not
sporadic meteoroids.
Paul Schlyter
Mar 2, 2013, 6:11:29 PM3/2/13
to
On Sat, 02 Mar 2013 11:23:52 -0700, Chris L Peterson
<c...@alumni.caltech.edu> wrote:
> Meteors are atmospheric phenomena
...and the science studying them is called meteorology... :-)
<c...@alumni.caltech.edu> wrote:
> Meteors are atmospheric phenomena
...and the science studying them is called meteorology... :-)
Chris L Peterson
Mar 2, 2013, 7:09:04 PM3/2/13
to
On Sun, 03 Mar 2013 00:11:29 +0100, Paul Schlyter <pau...@gmail.com>
wrote:
So it should be, just as the science of studying what is beyond Earth
should be called astrology. Not much you can do when the more correct
terms are already in use elsewhere... so we have meteoritics and
astronomy.
wrote:
should be called astrology. Not much you can do when the more correct
terms are already in use elsewhere... so we have meteoritics and
astronomy.
Davoud
Mar 3, 2013, 12:26:28 AM3/3/13
to
Paul Schlyter:
> >...and the science studying them [meteors] is called meteorology... :-)
Chris L Peterson:
or devising logical arguments, or something like that. Correction
noted. Most on-line dictionaries define meteoritics, but it is not
recognized in the Oxford American Dictionary.
If we outnumbered the astrology crowd we could seize the term from
them, but we're greatly outnumbered everywhere.
I don't much go around ranting and raving on the subject, but it
bothers me to see words either hijacked or twisted beyond use. "Gay."
I'm an advocate of civil rights and equal justice for all persons, but
I hate that that beautiful adjective has been narrowed in meaning to
the point that it is useless except for describing sexual orientation.
I know that I'm not allowed to say this, but I have observed that the
"gay" lifestyle is often tempestuous and very far from being gay, and
the word's current use strikes me as ironic. "Making love" used to mean
such things as holding hands. We'll never get that one back, either.
> >...and the science studying them [meteors] is called meteorology... :-)
Chris L Peterson:
> So it should be, just as the science of studying what is beyond Earth
> should be called astrology. Not much you can do when the more correct
> terms are already in use elsewhere... so we have meteoritics and
> astronomy.
I thought that meteoritics had to do with writing or delivering sermons
> should be called astrology. Not much you can do when the more correct
> terms are already in use elsewhere... so we have meteoritics and
> astronomy.
or devising logical arguments, or something like that. Correction
noted. Most on-line dictionaries define meteoritics, but it is not
recognized in the Oxford American Dictionary.
If we outnumbered the astrology crowd we could seize the term from
them, but we're greatly outnumbered everywhere.
I don't much go around ranting and raving on the subject, but it
bothers me to see words either hijacked or twisted beyond use. "Gay."
I'm an advocate of civil rights and equal justice for all persons, but
I hate that that beautiful adjective has been narrowed in meaning to
the point that it is useless except for describing sexual orientation.
I know that I'm not allowed to say this, but I have observed that the
"gay" lifestyle is often tempestuous and very far from being gay, and
the word's current use strikes me as ironic. "Making love" used to mean
such things as holding hands. We'll never get that one back, either.
Paul Schlyter
Mar 3, 2013, 1:32:04 AM3/3/13
to
On Sat, 02 Mar 2013 17:09:04 -0700, Chris L Peterson
"situated in the air". And meteorologists often call rain, snow, hail
etc "hydrometeors" and dry haze "litometeors".
<c...@alumni.caltech.edu> wrote:
> On Sun, 03 Mar 2013 00:11:29 +0100, Paul Schlyter <pau...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> >On Sat, 02 Mar 2013 11:23:52 -0700, Chris L Peterson
> ><c...@alumni.caltech.edu> wrote:
> >> Meteors are atmospheric phenomena
> >
> >...and the science studying them is called meteorology... :-)
> So it should be, just as the science of studying what is beyond
Earth
> should be called astrology. Not much you can do when the more
correct
> terms are already in use elsewhere... so we have meteoritics and
> astronomy.
The word meteor comes from the greek word "meteoros" which means
> On Sun, 03 Mar 2013 00:11:29 +0100, Paul Schlyter <pau...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> >On Sat, 02 Mar 2013 11:23:52 -0700, Chris L Peterson
> ><c...@alumni.caltech.edu> wrote:
> >> Meteors are atmospheric phenomena
> >
> >...and the science studying them is called meteorology... :-)
> So it should be, just as the science of studying what is beyond
Earth
> should be called astrology. Not much you can do when the more
correct
> terms are already in use elsewhere... so we have meteoritics and
> astronomy.
"situated in the air". And meteorologists often call rain, snow, hail
etc "hydrometeors" and dry haze "litometeors".
Brad Guth
Mar 3, 2013, 6:07:28 PM3/3/13
to
On Mar 2, 10:23 am, Chris L Peterson <c...@alumni.caltech.edu> wrote:
> On Sat, 2 Mar 2013 10:10:42 -0800 (PST), Brad Guth
>
> On Sat, 2 Mar 2013 10:10:42 -0800 (PST), Brad Guth
>
perhaps they'll have to start taking notice.
Chris L Peterson
Mar 3, 2013, 7:33:30 PM3/3/13
to
On Sun, 3 Mar 2013 15:07:28 -0800 (PST), Brad Guth
<brad...@gmail.com> wrote:
>When the Sirius Oort cloud starts tossing an asteroid a day at us,
>perhaps they'll have to start taking notice.
I'm not going to hold my breath. And if a bunch of stuff came our way,
<brad...@gmail.com> wrote:
>When the Sirius Oort cloud starts tossing an asteroid a day at us,
>perhaps they'll have to start taking notice.
it would make little sense for the military to be involved. We have
much more capable civilian agencies.
lal_truckee
Mar 3, 2013, 9:03:15 PM3/3/13
to
On 3/3/13 4:33 PM, Chris L Peterson wrote:
> it would make little sense for the military to be involved. We have
> much more capable civilian agencies.
Identify one, please.
> it would make little sense for the military to be involved. We have
> much more capable civilian agencies.
T.T
Mar 3, 2013, 11:29:36 PM3/3/13
to
"lal_truckee" <lal_t...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:kh0val$b0c$1...@dont-email.me...
The Boy Scouts.
Kim Kardashian.
Chris L Peterson
Mar 4, 2013, 12:07:05 AM3/4/13
to
Brad Guth
Mar 4, 2013, 1:59:57 AM3/4/13
to
On Mar 3, 9:07 pm, Chris L Peterson <c...@alumni.caltech.edu> wrote:
> On Sun, 03 Mar 2013 18:03:15 -0800, lal_truckee
>
> On Sun, 03 Mar 2013 18:03:15 -0800, lal_truckee
>
> <lal_truc...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> >On 3/3/13 4:33 PM, Chris L Peterson wrote:
> >> it would make little sense for the military to be involved. We have
> >> much more capable civilian agencies.
>
> >Identify one, please.
>
> NASA. JPL. ESA. NSF. And dozens of universities.
All of those combined don't have 1% the resources nor cutting edge
> >On 3/3/13 4:33 PM, Chris L Peterson wrote:
> >> it would make little sense for the military to be involved. We have
> >> much more capable civilian agencies.
>
> >Identify one, please.
>
> NASA. JPL. ESA. NSF. And dozens of universities.
technology to work with.
Davoud
Mar 4, 2013, 2:11:04 AM3/4/13
to
Chris L Peterson:
> >Identify one, please.
Chris L Peterson:
space than the military? In particular, which university is ready for
this? What department in the NSF? I posit that these groups are all
ready to form committees to /discuss/ an incoming city buster. I don't
know that the military is ready now, either, but we know that they can
track and destroy satellites and I think that they could more quickly
develop an anti-meteorite capability than any of the groups you named.
> >> it would make little sense for the military to be involved. We have
> >> much more capable civilian agencies.
lal_truckee:
> >> much more capable civilian agencies.
> >Identify one, please.
Chris L Peterson:
> NASA. JPL. ESA. NSF. And dozens of universities.
These groups have the ability to more quickly respond to a threat from
space than the military? In particular, which university is ready for
this? What department in the NSF? I posit that these groups are all
ready to form committees to /discuss/ an incoming city buster. I don't
know that the military is ready now, either, but we know that they can
track and destroy satellites and I think that they could more quickly
develop an anti-meteorite capability than any of the groups you named.
Martin Brown
Mar 4, 2013, 3:17:44 AM3/4/13
to
On 02/03/2013 18:10, Brad Guth wrote:
> On Feb 28, 7:27 pm, Davoud <s...@sky.net> wrote:
>> Davoud:
>>
>>>> The Air Force has no "meteor
>>>> detections capability," secret or otherwise, because the AF is not in
>>>> the business of detecting meteors, even if it does so inadvertently
>>> >from time to time.
>>
>> Chris L Peterson:
>>
>>> Actually, the military has superior meteor detecting capability. The
>>> DOD satellites that continuously monitor the Earth looking for covert
>>> nuclear explosions provide some of the best data available on meteors.
>>
>> So it's like I said, the AF is not in the business of detecting
>> meteors, even if it does so inadvertently from time to time.
There are various systems to detect airburst nuclear explosions and all
> On Feb 28, 7:27 pm, Davoud <s...@sky.net> wrote:
>> Davoud:
>>
>>>> The Air Force has no "meteor
>>>> detections capability," secret or otherwise, because the AF is not in
>>>> the business of detecting meteors, even if it does so inadvertently
>>> >from time to time.
>>
>> Chris L Peterson:
>>
>>> Actually, the military has superior meteor detecting capability. The
>>> DOD satellites that continuously monitor the Earth looking for covert
>>> nuclear explosions provide some of the best data available on meteors.
>>
>> So it's like I said, the AF is not in the business of detecting
>> meteors, even if it does so inadvertently from time to time.
of them (exept the long range earthquake detectors) saw the recent event
over Russia. As did enough serendipitous webcams to get a pretty good
fix on the trajectory from civilian data.
In a sense they have to be in the business of detecting meteors because
the most extreme ones may give false positives for a multi-kT airburst.
The speed of a meteor compared to a ballistic missile means that it is
outside their normal tracking velocity and range gate virtually until it
hits the atmosphere so it is no good for advanced warning.
Arecibo is the instrument of choice for ranging and tracking suspected
Earth imapctors - as happened with the one that slammed into the Nubian
desert in 2008 - ISTR with less than 24 hours warning.
http://phys.org/news/2010-12-meteorite-piece-unknown-celestial-body.html
>>
>> --
>> I agree with almost everything that you have said and almost everything that
>> you will say in your entire life.
>>
>> usenet *at* davidillig dawt cawm
>
> In other words, our USAF isn't in the business of tracking an incoming
> 50 Mt nuke from Russia or any other nation.
The orginal BMEWS was reckoned to be good enough to see a barn door over
>> --
>> I agree with almost everything that you have said and almost everything that
>> you will say in your entire life.
>>
>> usenet *at* davidillig dawt cawm
>
> In other words, our USAF isn't in the business of tracking an incoming
> 50 Mt nuke from Russia or any other nation.
Moscow and the detection limits of the new phased array kit is
classified but you can infer from the bits and pieces of space junk it
tracks in idle time is very small. It was designed to spot any incoming
ballistic missiles although in the early days it also saw the moon!
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ballistic_Missile_Early_Warning_System
BMEWS site 3A Fylingdales was still running a Cyber CDC 7600 for data
reduction from the old gear as late as the early 1990's.
Regards,
Martin Brown
Martin Brown
Mar 4, 2013, 3:41:09 AM3/4/13
to
On 04/03/2013 07:11, Davoud wrote:> Chris L Peterson:
>>>> it would make little sense for the military to be involved. We have
>>>> much more capable civilian agencies.
>
> lal_truckee:
>>> Identify one, please.
>
> Chris L Peterson:
>> NASA. JPL. ESA. NSF. And dozens of universities.
>
> These groups have the ability to more quickly respond to a threat from
> space than the military? In particular, which university is ready for
Don't pin your hopes on the military responding *quickly* to a new
>>>> it would make little sense for the military to be involved. We have
>>>> much more capable civilian agencies.
>
> lal_truckee:
>>> Identify one, please.
>
> Chris L Peterson:
>> NASA. JPL. ESA. NSF. And dozens of universities.
>
> These groups have the ability to more quickly respond to a threat from
> space than the military? In particular, which university is ready for
threat - they used to hand their prototype CCD chips over to certain
preferred university astronomy groups because they could build an entire
camera in less time than it took to get budget approval for a unit built
by military approved commercial contractors.
Sending Tom Cruise up to meet it in an F-16 will not cut the mustard.
> this? What department in the NSF? I posit that these groups are all
> ready to form committees to /discuss/ an incoming city buster. I don't
> know that the military is ready now, either, but we know that they can
> track and destroy satellites and I think that they could more quickly
> develop an anti-meteorite capability than any of the groups you named.
remarkably well after optical observers saw something moving too fast to
solve they fed it to the minor planets centre and Arecibo resulting in a
predicted impact in the Nubian desert which was observed to occur.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2008_TC3#Explosion
The one over Russia came as a bit of a surprise as the NEO tracking and
detection systems have improved enormously over the years. They catch
almost all the comets this way long before amateurs get a look in.
Regards,
Martin Brown
Chris L Peterson
Mar 4, 2013, 10:25:18 AM3/4/13
to
On Mon, 04 Mar 2013 02:11:04 -0500, Davoud <st...@sky.net> wrote:
>Chris L Peterson:
>> NASA. JPL. ESA. NSF. And dozens of universities.
>
>These groups have the ability to more quickly respond to a threat from
>space than the military?
I think so. The military is poorly equipped to respond quickly to most
>Chris L Peterson:
>> NASA. JPL. ESA. NSF. And dozens of universities.
>
>These groups have the ability to more quickly respond to a threat from
>space than the military?
things. Its leadership lacks the education and intellect found in the
above agencies. It lacks a significant space infrastructure (or more
precisely, the infrastructure it has is very narrowly focused).
I guess it depends on how we define a "threat from space".
Realistically, that is likely to be something that we learn about
years in advance, and have time to direct careful thought towards
(e.g. Apophis). Such a threat would almost certainly be detected by a
civilian academic entity (or even an amateur astronomer), and would
probably be dealt with by a coordinated effort between agencies. While
the military might play a role (particularly with regards to funding),
it seems likely that a group like JPL or JHUAPL would take the primary
lead (under contract from NASA), since a mitigation effort would
involve scientific and engineering challenges that they are much
better equipped to handle than the military is.
An "anti-meteorite" system isn't going to happen. There will be no
star-wars network of space-based lasers to shoot down intruding rocks.
A defense against a threat from space will, for the foreseeable
future, be a one-off thing, customized to a single threat detected
well in advance. Because if we don't detect it well in advance, there
is no defense, regardless of agency.
Chris L Peterson
Mar 4, 2013, 10:31:30 AM3/4/13
to
On Mon, 04 Mar 2013 08:17:44 +0000, Martin Brown
<|||newspam|||@nezumi.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>There are various systems to detect airburst nuclear explosions and all
>of them (exept the long range earthquake detectors) saw the recent event
>over Russia. As did enough serendipitous webcams to get a pretty good
>fix on the trajectory from civilian data.
>
>In a sense they have to be in the business of detecting meteors because
>the most extreme ones may give false positives for a multi-kT airburst.
>The speed of a meteor compared to a ballistic missile means that it is
>outside their normal tracking velocity and range gate virtually until it
>hits the atmosphere so it is no good for advanced warning.
Funding for the meteoritics work I do comes partly from military and
<|||newspam|||@nezumi.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>There are various systems to detect airburst nuclear explosions and all
>of them (exept the long range earthquake detectors) saw the recent event
>over Russia. As did enough serendipitous webcams to get a pretty good
>fix on the trajectory from civilian data.
>
>In a sense they have to be in the business of detecting meteors because
>the most extreme ones may give false positives for a multi-kT airburst.
>The speed of a meteor compared to a ballistic missile means that it is
>outside their normal tracking velocity and range gate virtually until it
>hits the atmosphere so it is no good for advanced warning.
nuclear non-proliferation organizations, interested in allsky cameras
and infrasound detectors focused on meteors, precisely because of the
concern that meteors can be confused with both covert nuclear
explosions and unannounced rocket launches. There is a real interest
in learning more about distinguishing the instrumental signatures of
these things.
Much of this concern stems to an incident about 20 years ago where a
very large meteoritic airburst triggered our launch detection systems.
oriel36
Mar 4, 2013, 11:28:34 AM3/4/13
to
On Mar 4, 4:25 pm, Chris L Peterson <c...@alumni.caltech.edu> wrote:
in astronomical interpretation -
"This is a little hard to explain, but it also has to do with us
watching the Sun from a tilted perspective. The Earth spins on its
axis about 366 and 1/4 times each year, but there are only 365 and 1/4
days per year."NASA
http://imagine.gsfc.nasa.gov/docs/ask_astro/answers/970714.html
That is not only intellectual dysfunction,the inability to
distinguish right from wrong or what is integrity from what is not is
lost to what clearly is reasoning that would only be found in an
asylum.It shows up in your hatred of faith and all the creativity and
productivity surrounding truly religious people and for the life of me
I simply cannot come to terms with zero counter arguments apart from
my contributions.
Would anyone trust an organization that could not line up all the
effects within a 24 hour day with a turning Earth and keep those
number of turnings in step with each 24 hour day ?.
> On Mon, 04 Mar 2013 02:11:04 -0500, Davoud <s...@sky.net> wrote:
> >Chris L Peterson:
> >> NASA. JPL. ESA. NSF. And dozens of universities.
>
> >These groups have the ability to more quickly respond to a threat from
> >space than the military?
>
> I think so. The military is poorly equipped to respond quickly to most
> things. Its leadership lacks the education and intellect found in the
> above agencies.
The intellect !,let's see where all those billions of dollars shows up
> >Chris L Peterson:
> >> NASA. JPL. ESA. NSF. And dozens of universities.
>
> >These groups have the ability to more quickly respond to a threat from
> >space than the military?
>
> I think so. The military is poorly equipped to respond quickly to most
> things. Its leadership lacks the education and intellect found in the
> above agencies.
in astronomical interpretation -
"This is a little hard to explain, but it also has to do with us
watching the Sun from a tilted perspective. The Earth spins on its
axis about 366 and 1/4 times each year, but there are only 365 and 1/4
days per year."NASA
http://imagine.gsfc.nasa.gov/docs/ask_astro/answers/970714.html
That is not only intellectual dysfunction,the inability to
distinguish right from wrong or what is integrity from what is not is
lost to what clearly is reasoning that would only be found in an
asylum.It shows up in your hatred of faith and all the creativity and
productivity surrounding truly religious people and for the life of me
I simply cannot come to terms with zero counter arguments apart from
my contributions.
Would anyone trust an organization that could not line up all the
effects within a 24 hour day with a turning Earth and keep those
number of turnings in step with each 24 hour day ?.
lal_truckee
Mar 4, 2013, 11:42:00 AM3/4/13
to
On 3/4/13 7:25 AM, Chris L Peterson wrote:
> I think so. The military is poorly equipped to respond quickly to most
> things. Its leadership lacks the education and intellect found in the
> above agencies. It lacks a significant space infrastructure (or more
> precisely, the infrastructure it has is very narrowly focused).
Those who do not remember Vanguard/Jupiter are condemned to crash on the
> I think so. The military is poorly equipped to respond quickly to most
> things. Its leadership lacks the education and intellect found in the
> above agencies. It lacks a significant space infrastructure (or more
> precisely, the infrastructure it has is very narrowly focused).
launch pad.
Also many of the acronymbic groups work for the military - their success
is military success as well.
Chris L Peterson
Mar 4, 2013, 1:41:00 PM3/4/13
to
On Mon, 04 Mar 2013 08:42:00 -0800, lal_truckee
<lal_t...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>Also many of the acronymbic groups work for the military - their success
>is military success as well.
Indeed, the military recognizes its own limitations in space
<lal_t...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>Also many of the acronymbic groups work for the military - their success
>is military success as well.
technology, which is why so much of its space interests are contracted
to private or civilian agencies.
palsing
Mar 4, 2013, 1:55:04 PM3/4/13
to
oriel36
Mar 4, 2013, 2:51:49 PM3/4/13
to
conditions,the utter hatred of the 24 hour AM/PM system tied to the
Lat/Long system which gives a definitive equatorial speed of 1037.5
miles per hour is something the world has not seen before and the
misplaced pride in an ideology which loses all ties to cause and
effect between dynamics and terrestrial sciences being supported by so
many,even if by their silence,is remarkable to behold.The fact is that
I no longer need to repeat what principles and values are correct and
what exactly went wrong a few centuries ago but it still needs to be
addressed at that level.
The hatred of faith and the love people have for something greater
than their own existence so this is not about factual right and
wrong,this is an assault on human integrity, achievement,enjoyment of
the past and hope for the future.You have just enough intelligence to
type words but not enough to reason and especially with the weight of
history bearing down on that stupid late 17th century mistake that
tried to tie daily rotation directly to stellar circumpolar motion and
you certainly feel nothing for the catastrophic damage your empirical
culture continues to inflict on Western civilization and that is what
makes this situation so dangerous - there are not enough people who
can appreciate the situation as opposed to your community who lacks
the normal intellectual values associated with human intelligence.
I look at how doctors read x-rays and know what is wrong and how to
proceed,the joy of those sequence of images which clearly show why
axial precession must be modified to take into account the annual
orbital component which carries the polar coordinates in a cycle/
circle to the central Sun is more than enough for any astronomer -
http://www.daviddarling.info/images/Uranus_rings_changes.jpg
None of you can read the sequence of images,can you ?,you are full of
hatred and personal animosity but when faced with a simple sequence
like that you don't have the intuitive sense to put the motions in
context.That is all that counts and live your life like an open grave
if you so wish,what you practice is something less than astronomy when
you can't affirm the equatorial speed of 1037.5 miles per hour and
subsequently the systems to which that value is attached.
Martin Nicholson
Mar 5, 2013, 3:26:02 AM3/5/13
to
On Mar 4, 7:51 pm, oriel36 <kelleher.ger...@gmail.com> wrote:
<Usual rubbish deleted.>
Sorry Oriel but you have been rumbled. For many years now you have
been recycling your arguments (your words BTW) on the outer fringes of
the astronomical world stating, but not explaining in any way, that
500 years worth of astronomers (your words BTW) are wrong and you are
right.
Isn't it time you stopped posting your extreme minority views on
threads that have nothing to do with your claims. It annoys other
people needlessly and does harm to the cause that you are, endlessly,
promoting.
Isn't it time that you tried to reach out to a new audience - one that
hasn't read (and rejected) your viewpoint quite literally hundreds of
times. If you care enough to post here multiple time a week - despite
widespread derision - why don't you care enough to explain your
viewpoint more clearly and most importantly why do so strongly and so
frequently refuse to answers any questions about your minority views.
Oriel crank, nutter or bot - frankly who cares?
<Usual rubbish deleted.>
Sorry Oriel but you have been rumbled. For many years now you have
been recycling your arguments (your words BTW) on the outer fringes of
the astronomical world stating, but not explaining in any way, that
500 years worth of astronomers (your words BTW) are wrong and you are
right.
Isn't it time you stopped posting your extreme minority views on
threads that have nothing to do with your claims. It annoys other
people needlessly and does harm to the cause that you are, endlessly,
promoting.
Isn't it time that you tried to reach out to a new audience - one that
hasn't read (and rejected) your viewpoint quite literally hundreds of
times. If you care enough to post here multiple time a week - despite
widespread derision - why don't you care enough to explain your
viewpoint more clearly and most importantly why do so strongly and so
frequently refuse to answers any questions about your minority views.
Oriel crank, nutter or bot - frankly who cares?
Brad Guth
Mar 6, 2013, 12:40:05 AM3/6/13
to
On Mar 4, 12:17 am, Martin Brown <|||newspam...@nezumi.demon.co.uk>
wrote:
Apparently our USAF as to be informed of when, where and how hard to
look.
wrote:
look.
Martin Brown
Mar 6, 2013, 3:05:20 AM3/6/13
to
space junk and determining its orbital elements and predicting re-entry
times and trajectories. Apart from running excercise training tapes that
means it spends most of its time cataloguing space junk.
The system is hot survey virtually all the time and will switch to live
track if anything that looks like an ICBM launch occurs in its field of
view. The new phased array slews very much faster than the old
mechanical dishes sat in their golf balls.
They are certainly good enough to track spanners and other tools dropped
by hapless astronauts. Photos of some items are online.
Regards,
Martin Brown
Robert Clark
Mar 6, 2013, 12:27:59 PM3/6/13
to
On Feb 28, 2:38 pm, Robert Clark <rgregorycl...@yahoo.com> wrote:
...
> If there is an association with the 2012 DA14 asteroid, then since
> it has approximately a year long orbit, this could explain why the
> fireballs are seen frequently in February. Note it was discovered
> last year in February also during a close approach.
> ...
On Mar 5, 11:31 am, Robert Clark <rgregorycl...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> Speculation here that such an impact could make Mars habitable:
>
> Rush to Mars: Comet impact could make Red Planet inhabitable.
> Published time: February 28, 2013 16:32
> http://rt.com/news/mars-comet-tito-flyby-601/
>
> Bob Clark
Assuming comet C/2013 A1 misses Mars by 37,000 km how much delta-v
would you need to nudge it to hit Mars?
This might not be purely of academic interest. Already we've seen two
Earth encounters whose likelihood together was one in hundreds of
millions.
This comet to make a close encounter to Mars is *huge*. To put it
perspective it dwarfs the asteroid that destroyed the dinosaurs. Such
close encounters to any of the terrestrial planets must be very rare.
For instance the puny, in comparison, asteroid 2012 DA14 would be
expected to get so close to the Earth once in 40 years. That such a
large comet would get so close to Mars must be much rarer than this.
So the chance is less than 1 in 40 in a year. Say it happens for
either of two planets; that's a chance of less than 1 in 20 in a year.
Say then it happens within a 2 year period; that's 1 chance in 10.
Now the chance of the three encounters occurring within such a close
time span is greater than one in several billion. The unlikelihoods
begin piling up greater and greater.
Then we are left with the disturbing possibility there is a physical
phenomenon causing these large, close encounters. And the possibility
arises there is another large, close encounter to the Earth that may
be upcoming.
It would really become important to know then not what's the delta-v
needed to turn a close miss to an impact, but in fact the reverse.
Bob Clark
...
> If there is an association with the 2012 DA14 asteroid, then since
> it has approximately a year long orbit, this could explain why the
> fireballs are seen frequently in February. Note it was discovered
> last year in February also during a close approach.
> ...
On Mar 5, 11:31 am, Robert Clark <rgregorycl...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> Speculation here that such an impact could make Mars habitable:
>
> Rush to Mars: Comet impact could make Red Planet inhabitable.
> Published time: February 28, 2013 16:32
> http://rt.com/news/mars-comet-tito-flyby-601/
>
> Bob Clark
Assuming comet C/2013 A1 misses Mars by 37,000 km how much delta-v
would you need to nudge it to hit Mars?
This might not be purely of academic interest. Already we've seen two
Earth encounters whose likelihood together was one in hundreds of
millions.
This comet to make a close encounter to Mars is *huge*. To put it
perspective it dwarfs the asteroid that destroyed the dinosaurs. Such
close encounters to any of the terrestrial planets must be very rare.
For instance the puny, in comparison, asteroid 2012 DA14 would be
expected to get so close to the Earth once in 40 years. That such a
large comet would get so close to Mars must be much rarer than this.
So the chance is less than 1 in 40 in a year. Say it happens for
either of two planets; that's a chance of less than 1 in 20 in a year.
Say then it happens within a 2 year period; that's 1 chance in 10.
Now the chance of the three encounters occurring within such a close
time span is greater than one in several billion. The unlikelihoods
begin piling up greater and greater.
Then we are left with the disturbing possibility there is a physical
phenomenon causing these large, close encounters. And the possibility
arises there is another large, close encounter to the Earth that may
be upcoming.
It would really become important to know then not what's the delta-v
needed to turn a close miss to an impact, but in fact the reverse.
Bob Clark
bob haller
Mar 6, 2013, 5:03:54 PM3/6/13
to
may be a good way to get rid of hazards....
theres a theory the earth has a planet killer type event every 34
million years or so. A couple weeks ago I posted we may be entering a
littered part of space.
If we are near misses and impacts may become more common.....
And currently we have no ability to redirect hazards........
Brad Guth
Mar 6, 2013, 7:20:50 PM3/6/13
to
thousands years to come.
Sam Wormley
Mar 7, 2013, 12:25:32 AM3/7/13
to
On 3/6/13 6:20 PM, Brad Guth wrote:
> The Oort clouds of Sirius should keep us on our toes for several
> thousands years to come.
No Brad -- Way too far away now and in the future.
> The Oort clouds of Sirius should keep us on our toes for several
> thousands years to come.
Robert Clark
Mar 7, 2013, 8:51:20 AM3/7/13
to
Centauri system Oort clouds and ours already intermingle.
Bob Clark
Robert Clark
Mar 7, 2013, 9:20:47 AM3/7/13
to
http://pubs.giss.nasa.gov/docs/1985/1985_Stothers.pdf
This proposes oscillation of the Sun about the galactic plane over
time scales of millions of years as the cause. Other possible causes
described here:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Extinction_event#Patterns_in_frequency
Bob Clark
palsing
Mar 7, 2013, 12:46:30 PM3/7/13
to
I don't think that any amount of reasoning will persuade Brad that the Sirius system is just a run-of-the-mill binary star system that just happens to be close, and has therefore been the subject of much study.
\Paul A
Brad Guth
Mar 9, 2013, 9:09:09 AM3/9/13
to
supposedly still out there in addition to whatever planets, moons and
asteroids it once had a very strong tidal radius grip upon.
palsing
Mar 9, 2013, 6:05:24 PM3/9/13
to
On Saturday, March 9, 2013 6:09:09 AM UTC-8, Brad Guth wrote:
> Sirius(a) was one a very big sucker, and most of its mass is
>
> supposedly still out there in addition to whatever planets, moons and
>
> asteroids it once had a very strong tidal radius grip upon.
Well, Sirius (a) is just Sirius itself, and it is only about twice the mass of our Sun, so NO, it is not a big sucker; the most massive star known is said to be 265 times as massive as the Sun...
> Sirius(a) was one a very big sucker, and most of its mass is
>
> supposedly still out there in addition to whatever planets, moons and
>
> asteroids it once had a very strong tidal radius grip upon.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_most_massive_stars
... now THAT is a big sucker.
The mass of the progenitor of Sirius (b) was supposedly about 5 times that of the Sun...
http://arxiv.org/abs/astro-ph/0507523
... but this result admittedly is made using a number of assumptions.
\Paul A
Robert Clark
Mar 11, 2013, 1:34:42 PM3/11/13
to
> This comet to make a close encounter to Mars is *huge*. To put it
> perspective it dwarfs the asteroid that destroyed the dinosaurs. Such
> close encounters to any of the terrestrial planets must be very rare.
> For instance the puny, in comparison, asteroid 2012 DA14 would be
> expected to get so close to the Earth once in 40 years. That such a
> large comet would get so close to Mars must be much rarer than this.
> So the chance is less than 1 in 40 in a year. Say it happens for
> either of two planets; that's a chance of less than 1 in 20 in a year.
> Say then it happens within a 2 year period; that's 1 chance in 10.
> Now the chance of the three encounters occurring within such a close
> time span is greater than one in several billion. The unlikelihoods
> begin piling up greater and greater.
>
Another recent comet came unusually close to the Earth in 2010:
> perspective it dwarfs the asteroid that destroyed the dinosaurs. Such
> close encounters to any of the terrestrial planets must be very rare.
> For instance the puny, in comparison, asteroid 2012 DA14 would be
> expected to get so close to the Earth once in 40 years. That such a
> large comet would get so close to Mars must be much rarer than this.
> So the chance is less than 1 in 40 in a year. Say it happens for
> either of two planets; that's a chance of less than 1 in 20 in a year.
> Say then it happens within a 2 year period; that's 1 chance in 10.
> Now the chance of the three encounters occurring within such a close
> time span is greater than one in several billion. The unlikelihoods
> begin piling up greater and greater.
>
Comet and Earth to Have Rare Close Encounter.
by Joe Rao, SPACE.com Skywatching Columnist Date: 01 October 2010
Time: 08:41 AM ET
[quote]Rare close encounter
This fall, Comet Hartley 2 will again be passing through the inner
solar system, reaching its closest point to the sun (called
perihelion) on Oct. 28 at a distance of 98.4 million miles (158.4
million km).
And while en route to the sun, it will also make a very close approach
to the Earth. In fact, at 3 p.m. ET on Oct. 20, the comet will be at
its closest point to our planet at a distance of 11.2 million miles
(18 million km).
It's quite unusual for any comet to approach this close to Earth. Such
an event only happens on average perhaps three or four times a
century.
[url]http://www.space.com/9240-comet-earth-rare-close-encounter.html[/
url][/quote]
So in a year the chance of a comet getting this close is between 1 in
33 to 1 in 25. Then over a 3 year period about 1 chance in 10. Now the
chance of all these rare events occurring within the same short time
frame is in the range of tens of billions to one.
Additionally we have the unusual comet coming up in November this
year, Comet ISON, expected to be one of the brightest in history:
The 9 Most Brilliant Comets Ever Seen.
by Joe Rao, SPACE.com Skywatching Columnist Date: 05 October 2012
Time: 12:24 PM ET
[quote]Comets that are visible to the naked eye during the daytime are
rare, but such cases are not unique. In the last 332 years, it has
happened only nine other times. Here is a listing of past comets that
have achieved this amazing feat.
[url]http://www.space.com/17918-9-most-brilliant-great-comets.html[/
url][/quote]
Now based on this rarity, the combination of unlikely events
happening on such a short time scale raises to an unlikelihood of
hundreds of billions to one.
This comet also will get unusually close to Mars at 0.07 AU, 10
million km:
Comet C/2012 S1 (ISON) is on its way to skirt around the Sun in
November 2013. Will Comet ISON achieve Great Comet status? I summarize
what we know about this promising comet and what it might become.
[quote]Earth and Mars Close Approaches.
Comet ISON makes two interesting close approaches. The first, in
October 2013, we will watch the comet pass by Mars at the small
distance of only 0.07 AU. This distance is small on the grand scale of
the Solar System, but it is still 10 million kilometers. The close
encounter may make comet ISON observable to NASA and ESA's spacecraft
orbiting Mars. Maybe we can even hope to see a picture of ISON from
NASA's Curiosity rover?
Although there is no possibility of such a close approach between the
Earth and comet, the second close approach I want to bring up will be
between the comet's orbit and the Earth. In January 2014, the Earth
will swing past a part of space that Comet ISON already traveled
through, at a small distance of only 0.03 AU. This encounter brings up
the possibility of a meteor shower on Earth. Meteor showers from Oort
Cloud comets are rare events indeed. Stay tuned while astronomers
consider this possibility.
[url]http://www.astro.umd.edu/~msk/blog/articles/comet-ison-jan13[/
url]
[/quote]
Assuming comets get so close as a small fraction of an AU to Mars as
rarely as they do to Earth, then on that basis we would also conclude,
aside from the brightness issue, that this comet adds another order of
magnitude to the unlikelihood of all the events occurring on such a
short time frame. (This consideration does not tack on another factor
of ten since this comet is already counted. It just offers another way
to draw the same conclusion.)
Note also the unlikelihood is almost certainly actually trillions to
one because the case of a comet the size of Comet C/2013 A1 (Siding
Spring) getting within just thousands of kilometers of a terrestrial
planet has to be [I]extremely[/I] rare, much worse than the 40 to 1 I
estimated previously.
This comet remember dwarfs the size of the asteroid that wiped out
the dinosaurs and would cause an even worse global extinction level
event if one of such size were to impact Earth.
Now note that trillions to one odds are such that we would not expect
it to happen during the entire age of the Solar System.
Bob Clark
Chris L Peterson
Mar 11, 2013, 2:27:01 PM3/11/13
to
On Mon, 11 Mar 2013 10:34:42 -0700 (PDT), Robert Clark
<rgrego...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> So in a year the chance of a comet getting this close is between 1 in
>33 to 1 in 25. Then over a 3 year period about 1 chance in 10. Now the
>chance of all these rare events occurring within the same short time
>frame is in the range of tens of billions to one.
However, that analysis is statistically meaningless, given that
<rgrego...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> So in a year the chance of a comet getting this close is between 1 in
>33 to 1 in 25. Then over a 3 year period about 1 chance in 10. Now the
>chance of all these rare events occurring within the same short time
>frame is in the range of tens of billions to one.
unrelated rare events happen all the time. By this logic, nothing
would ever happen.
bob haller
Mar 11, 2013, 8:55:20 PM3/11/13
to
distorting their orbits?
Message has been deleted
bob haller
Mar 11, 2013, 11:44:41 PM3/11/13
to
On Mar 11, 11:20 pm, Fred J. McCall <fjmcc...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Get a new whine, Bobbert.
>
> --
> "Some people get lost in thought because it's such unfamiliar
> territory."
> --G. Behn
given the err astronomical odds involved my theory is better than your
farts.........
so whats your theory?
> bob haller <hall...@aol.com> wrote:
>
> >perhaps this area of space has more debris, or something unknown is
> >distorting their orbits?
>
> Or perhaps God farted.
>
> >perhaps this area of space has more debris, or something unknown is
> >distorting their orbits?
>
>
> Get a new whine, Bobbert.
>
> --
> "Some people get lost in thought because it's such unfamiliar
> territory."
> --G. Behn
given the err astronomical odds involved my theory is better than your
farts.........
so whats your theory?
Robert Clark
Mar 12, 2013, 3:34:46 AM3/12/13
to
On Mar 11, 8:55 pm, bob haller <hall...@aol.com> wrote:
> On Mar 11, 1:34 pm, Robert Clark <rgregorycl...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> ...
> On Mar 11, 1:34 pm, Robert Clark <rgregorycl...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> > Now note that trillions to one odds are such that we would not expect
> > it to happen during the entire age of the Solar System.
>
> > Bob Clark
>
> perhaps this area of space has more debris, or something unknown is
> distorting their orbits?
Here are some suggested physical phenomena that could cause periodic
> > it to happen during the entire age of the Solar System.
>
> > Bob Clark
>
> perhaps this area of space has more debris, or something unknown is
> distorting their orbits?
cometary impacts that were proposed to explain the periodic
extinctions that have been observed in Earth's fossil record:
Extinction event.
Patterns in frequency
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Extinction_event#Patterns_in_frequency
It is notable that one of them suggests such an increase in comets
should be occurring geologically "soon":
CAMBRIDGE CONFERENCE DIGEST, 02/02/98
http://abob.libs.uga.edu/bobk/ccc/cc020298.html
Another perhaps more benign explanation is a theory proposed in 2007
there should be an increase in the number of sun grazing comets the
next few years:
Kreutz Sungrazers
"Several members of the Kreutz family have become Great Comets,
occasionally visible near the Sun in the daytime sky. The most recent
of these was Comet Ikeya–Seki in 1965, which may have been one of the
brightest comets in the last millennium.[1] It has been suggested that
another cluster of bright Kreutz system comets may begin to arrive in
the inner Solar System in the next few years to decades.[2]"
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kreutz_Sungrazers
This appears to have been validated:
"Suicide" Comet Storm Hits Sun—Bigger Sun-Kisser Coming?
Andrew Fazekas
for National Geographic News
Published January 17, 2011
[Quote]A recent storm of small comets that pelted the sun could herald
the coming a much bigger icy visitor, astronomers say.
Since its launch in 1995, NASA's Solar and Heliospheric Observatory,
or SOHO, orbiter has captured pictures of 2,000 comets as they've
flown past the sun.
Most of these comets are so-called sungrazers, relatively tiny comets
whose orbits bring them so near the sun that they are often vaporized
within hours of discovery.
The sun-watching telescope usually picks up one sungrazer every few
days. But between December 13 and 22, SOHO saw more than two dozen
sungrazers appear and disintegrate.
Seeing "25 comets in just ten days, that's unprecedented," Karl
Battams, of the United States Naval Research Laboratory in Washington,
D.C., said in a statement. "It was crazy!"
According to Battams and colleagues, the comet swarm could be
forerunner fragments from a much larger parent comet that may be
headed along a similar path. And such a large icy body coming so near
the sun would result in a spectacular sky show.[/quote]
http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2011/01/110117-comets-storm-sun-soho-nasa-sungrazing-science-space/
It's interesting this prediction of the SOHO scientists appears to be
confirmed by the discovery of the sungrazing Comet ISON in September,
2012, expected to be one of the brightest comets in history
In any case an increase of sun grazers could also correspond to an
increase in close flybys of comets by the terrestrial planets. A
problem though is this increase could itself be due to a disruption of
the comets in the Oort Cloud.
Bob Clark
Message has been deleted
Jeff Findley
Mar 12, 2013, 8:51:29 AM3/12/13
to
In article <13a4ac54-a680-4968-a329-b355aeed1357
@k4g2000yqn.googlegroups.com>, hal...@aol.com says...
assertion.
Jeff
--
"the perennial claim that hypersonic airbreathing propulsion would
magically make space launch cheaper is nonsense -- LOX is much cheaper
than advanced airbreathing engines, and so are the tanks to put it in
and the extra thrust to carry it." - Henry Spencer
@k4g2000yqn.googlegroups.com>, hal...@aol.com says...
>
> perhaps this area of space has more debris, or something unknown is
> distorting their orbits?
Unsupported assertion. But then, that's your favorite kind of
> perhaps this area of space has more debris, or something unknown is
> distorting their orbits?
assertion.
Jeff
--
"the perennial claim that hypersonic airbreathing propulsion would
magically make space launch cheaper is nonsense -- LOX is much cheaper
than advanced airbreathing engines, and so are the tanks to put it in
and the extra thrust to carry it." - Henry Spencer
Brad Guth
Mar 15, 2013, 9:53:09 AM3/15/13
to
Oort cloud closes in, we're in for an ever increasing cosmic show of
force, as well as contributions from this other Oort cloud.
Those Sirius stars used to be worth 12.5 Ms, unless there was once a
third one.
Robert Clark
Mar 27, 2013, 1:17:37 PM3/27/13
to
Last weekends meteor over the east coast U.S. was not uncommon
according to NASA:
Boulder-Size Asteroid Caused Friday's East Coast Meteor, NASA Says.
By Mike Wall | SPACE.com – Sat, Mar 23, 2013
[url]http://news.yahoo.com/boulder-size-asteroid-caused-fridays-east-
coast-meteor-194918370.html[/url]
It's estimated about 100 of these meter-sized boulders hit the
Earth's atmosphere every year; this one was uncommon in being over a
heavily populated area. The fireball over the Bay Area in California
in February also was not an uncommonly large one.
However, there may be a characteristic of the east coast meteor that
is uncommon, and that is its speed. It's been estimated to have been
traveling at perhaps 20 miles per second:
Fiery meteor streaks across Massachusetts’ night sky, seen up and down
the East Coast
03/22/2013 11:58 PM
[Quote]
“This is not nearly as big as [Russia’s meteor], not in a long shot,”
said Beatty. “There’s a hundred tons of meteorite that hit the Earth’s
atmosphere every day. [This] was a large-ish object that may have been
the size of about a washing machine, approximately.”
Beatty said the object hit the planet’s atmosphere traveling northwest
to southeast at an estimated 20 miles-per-second, but it could have
been anywhere from 15 to 50 miles-per-second.[/quote]
http://www.boston.com/metrodesk/2013/03/22/fiery-meteor-streaks-across-massachusetts-night-sky-seen-and-down-the-east-coast/jYTaZUlkOhf4tK4UkiS8hO/story.html
East coast residents marvel at Friday night meteor.
Mar 23, 2013 5:32 PM EDT Updated: Mar 23, 2013 6:03 PM EDT
[Quote]
Beatty tells FOX 25 Friday night's meteor was traveling at a speed
equivalent to traveling from Boston to New York in about 10 seconds.[/
quote]
http://www.myfoxboston.com/story/21776174/2013/03/23/east-coast-residents-marvel-at-meteor#ixzz2Og4hz4VH
The distance from Boston to New York is 190 miles. The meteor was
seen from Boston to New York. Then fixing the time by video cameras
when it appeared over Boston compared to New York would give us an
accurate idea of its speed.
IF it really was traveling at 20 miles per second then that would put
it in an unusual category since that would put it at the highest speed
ever measured for a meteor:
64,000 mph asteroid was fastest on record.
By Brian Dodson
December 30, 2012
[quote]
At about 14:51 GMT on April 22, 2012, a fireball was seen throughout
the western United States, accompanied by a loud booming sound heard
over much of California's Sierra Nevada mountains around Lake Tahoe.
Scientists have now carried out a thorough analysis of the meteorite
and found that it was the fastest meteor ever recorded at 28.6 km/s
(64000 mph).[/quote]
http://www.gizmag.com/sutters-hill-meteor-fastest-kiloton-radar/25552/
Sutter’s Mill Meteor Fastest, Most Diverse Ever.
December 21, 2012 at 04:57 Merryl Azriel
[url]http://www.spacesafetymagazine.com/2012/12/21/sutters-mill-meteor-
fastest/[/url]
A speed of 20 miles per second for the east coast meteor would put it
slightly ahead of the Sutter's Mill meteor which was at 64,000 mph,
17.8 miles per second.
NASA is putting up a list of bolides, fireballs on its NEO web page:
Fireball and Bolide Reports.
[url]http://neo.jpl.nasa.gov/fireballs/[/url]
So far it only has the the Chelyabinsk meteor on the list. I think it
should also include meteors of size as the east coast and Bay Area
meteors, even if ones this size occur a hundred times a year. Such
events may still have unusual characteristics that would be uncovered
by open dissemination of their physical aspects.
The American Meteor Society has released an analysis of the number of
reports made to them by the public of fireballs over the last few
years. They conclude that while there has been a definite increase,
because of the increasing awareness and the technical tools to report
such events, no conclusion can be made about whether this represents a
real increase in the number of events:
Fireball Tracking System Analysis.
Analysis of the AMS Citizen Science Based Fireball Tracking System.
[url]http://www.amsmeteors.org/fireballs/fireball-tracking-system-
analysis/[/url]
Bob Clark
according to NASA:
Boulder-Size Asteroid Caused Friday's East Coast Meteor, NASA Says.
By Mike Wall | SPACE.com – Sat, Mar 23, 2013
[url]http://news.yahoo.com/boulder-size-asteroid-caused-fridays-east-
coast-meteor-194918370.html[/url]
It's estimated about 100 of these meter-sized boulders hit the
Earth's atmosphere every year; this one was uncommon in being over a
heavily populated area. The fireball over the Bay Area in California
in February also was not an uncommonly large one.
However, there may be a characteristic of the east coast meteor that
is uncommon, and that is its speed. It's been estimated to have been
traveling at perhaps 20 miles per second:
Fiery meteor streaks across Massachusetts’ night sky, seen up and down
the East Coast
03/22/2013 11:58 PM
[Quote]
“This is not nearly as big as [Russia’s meteor], not in a long shot,”
said Beatty. “There’s a hundred tons of meteorite that hit the Earth’s
atmosphere every day. [This] was a large-ish object that may have been
the size of about a washing machine, approximately.”
Beatty said the object hit the planet’s atmosphere traveling northwest
to southeast at an estimated 20 miles-per-second, but it could have
been anywhere from 15 to 50 miles-per-second.[/quote]
http://www.boston.com/metrodesk/2013/03/22/fiery-meteor-streaks-across-massachusetts-night-sky-seen-and-down-the-east-coast/jYTaZUlkOhf4tK4UkiS8hO/story.html
East coast residents marvel at Friday night meteor.
Mar 23, 2013 5:32 PM EDT Updated: Mar 23, 2013 6:03 PM EDT
[Quote]
Beatty tells FOX 25 Friday night's meteor was traveling at a speed
equivalent to traveling from Boston to New York in about 10 seconds.[/
quote]
http://www.myfoxboston.com/story/21776174/2013/03/23/east-coast-residents-marvel-at-meteor#ixzz2Og4hz4VH
The distance from Boston to New York is 190 miles. The meteor was
seen from Boston to New York. Then fixing the time by video cameras
when it appeared over Boston compared to New York would give us an
accurate idea of its speed.
IF it really was traveling at 20 miles per second then that would put
it in an unusual category since that would put it at the highest speed
ever measured for a meteor:
64,000 mph asteroid was fastest on record.
By Brian Dodson
December 30, 2012
[quote]
At about 14:51 GMT on April 22, 2012, a fireball was seen throughout
the western United States, accompanied by a loud booming sound heard
over much of California's Sierra Nevada mountains around Lake Tahoe.
Scientists have now carried out a thorough analysis of the meteorite
and found that it was the fastest meteor ever recorded at 28.6 km/s
(64000 mph).[/quote]
http://www.gizmag.com/sutters-hill-meteor-fastest-kiloton-radar/25552/
Sutter’s Mill Meteor Fastest, Most Diverse Ever.
December 21, 2012 at 04:57 Merryl Azriel
[url]http://www.spacesafetymagazine.com/2012/12/21/sutters-mill-meteor-
fastest/[/url]
A speed of 20 miles per second for the east coast meteor would put it
slightly ahead of the Sutter's Mill meteor which was at 64,000 mph,
17.8 miles per second.
NASA is putting up a list of bolides, fireballs on its NEO web page:
Fireball and Bolide Reports.
[url]http://neo.jpl.nasa.gov/fireballs/[/url]
So far it only has the the Chelyabinsk meteor on the list. I think it
should also include meteors of size as the east coast and Bay Area
meteors, even if ones this size occur a hundred times a year. Such
events may still have unusual characteristics that would be uncovered
by open dissemination of their physical aspects.
The American Meteor Society has released an analysis of the number of
reports made to them by the public of fireballs over the last few
years. They conclude that while there has been a definite increase,
because of the increasing awareness and the technical tools to report
such events, no conclusion can be made about whether this represents a
real increase in the number of events:
Fireball Tracking System Analysis.
Analysis of the AMS Citizen Science Based Fireball Tracking System.
[url]http://www.amsmeteors.org/fireballs/fireball-tracking-system-
analysis/[/url]
Bob Clark
Chris L Peterson
Mar 27, 2013, 2:36:34 PM3/27/13
to
On Wed, 27 Mar 2013 10:17:37 -0700 (PDT), Robert Clark
<rgrego...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> IF it really was traveling at 20 miles per second then that would put
>it in an unusual category since that would put it at the highest speed
>ever measured for a meteor:
Not even close. Meteors range in speed from 7 miles per second at the
<rgrego...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> IF it really was traveling at 20 miles per second then that would put
>it in an unusual category since that would put it at the highest speed
>ever measured for a meteor:
slowest to 45 miles per second at the fastest.
Some of the articles about the Sutter's Mill meteorite were confused
about this. It was by no means a fast meteor- indeed, it was very
slow. At 17.8 miles per second, it was suggested that Sutter's Mill
represented the fastest known meteor that produced meteorites, not
that it was the fastest meteor.
bob haller
Mar 27, 2013, 3:43:28 PM3/27/13
to
On Mar 27, 1:17 pm, Robert Clark <rgregorycl...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> Last weekends meteor over the east coast U.S. was not uncommon
> according to NASA:
>
> Boulder-Size Asteroid Caused Friday's East Coast Meteor, NASA Says.
> By Mike Wall | SPACE.com – Sat, Mar 23, 2013
> [url]http://news.yahoo.com/boulder-size-asteroid-caused-fridays-east-
> coast-meteor-194918370.html[/url]
>
> It's estimated about 100 of these meter-sized boulders hit the
> Earth's atmosphere every year; this one was uncommon in being over a
> heavily populated area. The fireball over the Bay Area in California
> in February also was not an uncommonly large one.
> However, there may be a characteristic of the east coast meteor that
> is uncommon, and that is its speed. It's been estimated to have been
> traveling at perhaps 20 miles per second:
>
> Fiery meteor streaks across Massachusetts’ night sky, seen up and down
> the East Coast
> 03/22/2013 11:58 PM
> [Quote]
> “This is not nearly as big as [Russia’s meteor], not in a long shot,”
> said Beatty. “There’s a hundred tons of meteorite that hit the Earth’s
> atmosphere every day. [This] was a large-ish object that may have been
> the size of about a washing machine, approximately.”
> Beatty said the object hit the planet’s atmosphere traveling northwest
> to southeast at an estimated 20 miles-per-second, but it could have
> been anywhere from 15 to 50 miles-per-second.[/quote]http://www.boston.com/metrodesk/2013/03/22/fiery-meteor-streaks-acros...
> Last weekends meteor over the east coast U.S. was not uncommon
> according to NASA:
>
> Boulder-Size Asteroid Caused Friday's East Coast Meteor, NASA Says.
> By Mike Wall | SPACE.com – Sat, Mar 23, 2013
> [url]http://news.yahoo.com/boulder-size-asteroid-caused-fridays-east-
> coast-meteor-194918370.html[/url]
>
> It's estimated about 100 of these meter-sized boulders hit the
> Earth's atmosphere every year; this one was uncommon in being over a
> heavily populated area. The fireball over the Bay Area in California
> in February also was not an uncommonly large one.
> However, there may be a characteristic of the east coast meteor that
> is uncommon, and that is its speed. It's been estimated to have been
> traveling at perhaps 20 miles per second:
>
> Fiery meteor streaks across Massachusetts’ night sky, seen up and down
> the East Coast
> 03/22/2013 11:58 PM
> [Quote]
> “This is not nearly as big as [Russia’s meteor], not in a long shot,”
> said Beatty. “There’s a hundred tons of meteorite that hit the Earth’s
> atmosphere every day. [This] was a large-ish object that may have been
> the size of about a washing machine, approximately.”
> Beatty said the object hit the planet’s atmosphere traveling northwest
> to southeast at an estimated 20 miles-per-second, but it could have
>
> East coast residents marvel at Friday night meteor.
> Mar 23, 2013 5:32 PM EDT Updated: Mar 23, 2013 6:03 PM EDT
> [Quote]
> Beatty tells FOX 25 Friday night's meteor was traveling at a speed
> equivalent to traveling from Boston to New York in about 10 seconds.[/
> quote]http://www.myfoxboston.com/story/21776174/2013/03/23/east-coast-resid...
> East coast residents marvel at Friday night meteor.
> Mar 23, 2013 5:32 PM EDT Updated: Mar 23, 2013 6:03 PM EDT
> [Quote]
> Beatty tells FOX 25 Friday night's meteor was traveling at a speed
> equivalent to traveling from Boston to New York in about 10 seconds.[/
just a number of events per year.....
Chris L Peterson
Mar 27, 2013, 6:48:40 PM3/27/13
to
On Wed, 27 Mar 2013 12:43:28 -0700 (PDT), bob haller <hal...@aol.com>
wrote:
>Norad tacks stuff like this, it would be interesting if they released
>just a number of events per year.....
Norad tracks none of this. Norad has a radar system that keeps track
of man-made objects in orbit around the Earth. Their system is not
designed to detect meteoroids at all. There is a system in place that
detects bright flashes in the atmosphere, which includes meteors. But
by then, it's too late to learn anything about the parent meteoroid.
wrote:
>Norad tacks stuff like this, it would be interesting if they released
>just a number of events per year.....
of man-made objects in orbit around the Earth. Their system is not
designed to detect meteoroids at all. There is a system in place that
detects bright flashes in the atmosphere, which includes meteors. But
by then, it's too late to learn anything about the parent meteoroid.
Brad Guth
Mar 27, 2013, 8:09:14 PM3/27/13
to
us the whole truth and nothing but the truth. Perhaps making our
oligarchs into unhappy campers is not such a good idea, because the
last time they made 911 happen and otherwise took down the wrong 747.
Robert Clark
May 17, 2013, 11:34:24 AM5/17/13
to
On Mar 27, 1:17 pm, Robert Clark <rgregorycl...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> Last weekends meteor over the east coast U.S. was not uncommon
> according to NASA:
>
> Boulder-Size Asteroid Caused Friday's East Coast Meteor, NASA Says.
> By Mike Wall | SPACE.com – Sat, Mar 23, 2013
> [url]http://news.yahoo.com/boulder-size-asteroid-caused-fridays-east-
> coast-meteor-194918370.html[/url]
>
> It's estimated about 100 of these meter-sized boulders hit the
> Earth's atmosphere every year; this one was uncommon in being over a
> heavily populated area. Thefireballover the Bay Area in California
> Last weekends meteor over the east coast U.S. was not uncommon
> according to NASA:
>
> Boulder-Size Asteroid Caused Friday's East Coast Meteor, NASA Says.
> By Mike Wall | SPACE.com – Sat, Mar 23, 2013
> [url]http://news.yahoo.com/boulder-size-asteroid-caused-fridays-east-
> coast-meteor-194918370.html[/url]
>
> It's estimated about 100 of these meter-sized boulders hit the
> Earth's atmosphere every year; this one was uncommon in being over a
> in February also was not an uncommonly large one.
> However, there may be a characteristic of the east coast meteor that
> is uncommon, and that is its speed. It's been estimated to have been
> traveling at perhaps 20 miles per second:
>
> Fiery meteor streaks across Massachusetts’ night sky, seen up and down
> the East Coast
> 03/22/2013 11:58 PM
> [Quote]
> “This is not nearly as big as [Russia’s meteor], not in a long shot,”
> said Beatty. “There’s a hundred tons of meteorite that hit the Earth’s
> atmosphere every day. [This] was a large-ish object that may have been
> the size of about a washing machine, approximately.”
> Beatty said the object hit the planet’s atmosphere traveling northwest
> to southeast at an estimated 20 miles-per-second, but it could have
> been anywhere from 15 to 50 miles-per-second.[/quote]http://www.boston.com/metrodesk/2013/03/22/fiery-meteor-streaks-acros...
> However, there may be a characteristic of the east coast meteor that
> is uncommon, and that is its speed. It's been estimated to have been
> traveling at perhaps 20 miles per second:
>
> Fiery meteor streaks across Massachusetts’ night sky, seen up and down
> the East Coast
> 03/22/2013 11:58 PM
> [Quote]
> “This is not nearly as big as [Russia’s meteor], not in a long shot,”
> said Beatty. “There’s a hundred tons of meteorite that hit the Earth’s
> atmosphere every day. [This] was a large-ish object that may have been
> the size of about a washing machine, approximately.”
> Beatty said the object hit the planet’s atmosphere traveling northwest
> to southeast at an estimated 20 miles-per-second, but it could have
>
> East coast residents marvel at Friday night meteor.
> Mar 23, 2013 5:32 PM EDT Updated: Mar 23, 2013 6:03 PM EDT
> [Quote]
> Beatty tells FOX 25 Friday night's meteor was traveling at a speed
> equivalent to traveling from Boston to New York in about 10 seconds.[/
> quote]http://www.myfoxboston.com/story/21776174/2013/03/23/east-coast-resid...
> East coast residents marvel at Friday night meteor.
> Mar 23, 2013 5:32 PM EDT Updated: Mar 23, 2013 6:03 PM EDT
> [Quote]
> Beatty tells FOX 25 Friday night's meteor was traveling at a speed
> equivalent to traveling from Boston to New York in about 10 seconds.[/
>
> The distance from Boston to New York is 190 miles. The meteor was
> seen from Boston to New York. Then fixing the time by video cameras
> when it appeared over Boston compared to New York would give us an
> accurate idea of its speed.
>
> IF it really was traveling at 20 miles per second then that would put
> it in an unusual category since that would put it at the highest speed
> ever measured for a meteor:
>
> 64,000 mph asteroid was fastest on record.
> By Brian Dodson
> December 30, 2012
> [quote]
> At about 14:51 GMT on April 22, 2012, afireballwas seen throughout
> The distance from Boston to New York is 190 miles. The meteor was
> seen from Boston to New York. Then fixing the time by video cameras
> when it appeared over Boston compared to New York would give us an
> accurate idea of its speed.
>
> IF it really was traveling at 20 miles per second then that would put
> it in an unusual category since that would put it at the highest speed
> ever measured for a meteor:
>
> 64,000 mph asteroid was fastest on record.
> By Brian Dodson
> December 30, 2012
> [quote]
> the western United States, accompanied by a loud booming sound heard
> over much of California's Sierra Nevada mountains around Lake Tahoe.
> Scientists have now carried out a thorough analysis of the meteorite
> and found that it was the fastest meteor ever recorded at 28.6 km/s
> (64000 mph).[/quote]http://www.gizmag.com/sutters-hill-meteor-fastest-kiloton-radar/25552/
>
> Sutter’s Mill Meteor Fastest, Most Diverse Ever.
> December 21, 2012 at 04:57 Merryl Azriel
> [url]http://www.spacesafetymagazine.com/2012/12/21/sutters-mill-meteor-
> fastest/[/url]
>
> A speed of 20 miles per second for the east coast meteor would put it
> slightly ahead of the Sutter's Mill meteor which was at 64,000 mph,
> 17.8 miles per second.
>
> NASA is putting up a list of bolides, fireballs on its NEO web page:
>
> Fireballand Bolide Reports.
> over much of California's Sierra Nevada mountains around Lake Tahoe.
> Scientists have now carried out a thorough analysis of the meteorite
> and found that it was the fastest meteor ever recorded at 28.6 km/s
> (64000 mph).[/quote]http://www.gizmag.com/sutters-hill-meteor-fastest-kiloton-radar/25552/
>
> Sutter’s Mill Meteor Fastest, Most Diverse Ever.
> December 21, 2012 at 04:57 Merryl Azriel
> [url]http://www.spacesafetymagazine.com/2012/12/21/sutters-mill-meteor-
> fastest/[/url]
>
> A speed of 20 miles per second for the east coast meteor would put it
> slightly ahead of the Sutter's Mill meteor which was at 64,000 mph,
> 17.8 miles per second.
>
> NASA is putting up a list of bolides, fireballs on its NEO web page:
>
> [url]http://neo.jpl.nasa.gov/fireballs/[/url]
>
> So far it only has the the Chelyabinsk meteor on the list. I think it
> should also include meteors of size as the east coast and Bay Area
> meteors, even if ones this size occur a hundred times a year. Such
> events may still have unusual characteristics that would be uncovered
> by open dissemination of their physical aspects.
>
> The American Meteor Society has released an analysis of the number of
> reports made to them by the public of fireballs over the last few
> years. They conclude that while there has been a definite increase,
> because of the increasing awareness and the technical tools to report
> such events, no conclusion can be made about whether this represents a
> real increase in the number of events:
>
> FireballTracking System Analysis.
>
> So far it only has the the Chelyabinsk meteor on the list. I think it
> should also include meteors of size as the east coast and Bay Area
> meteors, even if ones this size occur a hundred times a year. Such
> events may still have unusual characteristics that would be uncovered
> by open dissemination of their physical aspects.
>
> The American Meteor Society has released an analysis of the number of
> reports made to them by the public of fireballs over the last few
> years. They conclude that while there has been a definite increase,
> because of the increasing awareness and the technical tools to report
> such events, no conclusion can be made about whether this represents a
> real increase in the number of events:
>
> Analysis of the AMS Citizen Science BasedFireballTracking System.
A program to detect meteor impacts on the Moon saw its largest one
in its eight year history on March 17th:
ScienceCasts: Bright Explosion on the Moon.
Published on May 16, 2013
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IYloGuUZCFM&
The video mentions there were some bright fireballs over Earth the
same day so the events are believed related.
This was 5 days before the east coast fireball and such fireball
events occur on average twice a week somewhere on Earth, so they are
not necessarily connected. Still it is notable this March 17th impact
on the Moon was the brightest one they've seen in eight years.
Bob Clark
Robert Clark
Oct 3, 2013, 7:21:18 AM10/3/13
to
"Robert Clark" <rgrego...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:ac10fc90-14af-457b...@a8g2000yqp.googlegroups.com...
> ...
By Miriam Kramer, Staff Writer | September 30, 2013 03:18pm ET
<Quote>
"This was a very bright event," Bill Cooke of NASA's Meteoroid Environment
Office told Spaceweather.com. "Flares saturated our meteor cameras, and made
determination of the end point (the terminus of the fireball's flight
through the atmosphere) virtually impossible. Judging from the brightness,
we are dealing with a meter class object."</quote>
http://www.space.com/23001-meteor-fireball-ohio-video.html
By Deborah Byrd in
BLOGS | EARTH | HUMAN WORLD on Sep 28, 2013
U.S. sees another bright fireball on September 27.
<Quote>
September 2013 has been busy for sightings of bright fireballs. The one at
11:33 p.m. local time on September 27 was the 14th fireball sighting in the
U.S. in September.
The American Meteor Society (AMS) has reported at least 373 reports of
another bright fireball – a very bright meteor, likely a small chunk of
natural incoming space debris – over the U.S. last night (September 27,
2013). These reports followed a similar event over approximately the same
area the day before (September 26). The AMS called the coincidence of two
bright fireballs, or bright meteors, spotted over approximately the same
region on consecutive days "surprising." Witnesses from Georgia, Illinois,
Indiana, Kentucky, Maryland, North Carolina, New York, Ohio, Pennsylvania,
Tennessee, Virginia, Wisconsin and West Virginia reported a bright light
moving across the night sky on September 27 at around 11:33 p.m. local time,
according to the AMS.
Fireball might sound ominous, but it is just the word astronomers use to
mean bright meteor. As seen from a whole-Earth perspective, fireballs are
seen often. It’s unusual to have two appear on consecutive nights over the
same region, however.
September 2013 has been a busy month for sightings of bright meteors,
according to the AMS. Last night’s event marks the 14th fireball sighting
with at least 25 witnesses in September, the most ever since the AMS started
recording sightings online, they say.</quote>
http://earthsky.org/earth/u-s-midwest-sees-another-bright-fireball
The coincidences keep building and building ...
Bob Clark
--
Single-stage-to-orbit was already shown possible 50 years ago
with the Titan II first stage.
In fact, contrary to popular belief SSTO's are actually easy.
Just use the most efficient engines and stages at the same time,
and the result will automatically be SSTO.
Blog: Http://Exoscientist.blogspot.com
news:ac10fc90-14af-457b...@a8g2000yqp.googlegroups.com...
>
> NASA is putting up a list of bolides, fireballs on its NEO web page:
>
> Fireballand Bolide Reports.
> [url]http://neo.jpl.nasa.gov/fireballs/[/url]
>
> So far it only has the the Chelyabinsk meteor on the list. I think it
> should also include meteors of size as the east coast and Bay Area
> meteors, even if ones this size occur a hundred times a year. Such
> events may still have unusual characteristics that would be uncovered
> by open dissemination of their physical aspects.
>
> The American Meteor Society has released an analysis of the number of
> reports made to them by the public of fireballs over the last few
> years. They conclude that while there has been a definite increase,
> because of the increasing awareness and the technical tools to report
> such events, no conclusion can be made about whether this represents a
> real increase in the number of events:
>
> FireballTracking System Analysis.
> Analysis of the AMS Citizen Science BasedFireballTracking System.
> [url]http://www.amsmeteors.org/fireballs/fireball-tracking-system-
> analysis/[/url]
>
Meteor Sparks Incredible Fireball Over US Midwest (Video).
> NASA is putting up a list of bolides, fireballs on its NEO web page:
>
> Fireballand Bolide Reports.
> [url]http://neo.jpl.nasa.gov/fireballs/[/url]
>
> So far it only has the the Chelyabinsk meteor on the list. I think it
> should also include meteors of size as the east coast and Bay Area
> meteors, even if ones this size occur a hundred times a year. Such
> events may still have unusual characteristics that would be uncovered
> by open dissemination of their physical aspects.
>
> The American Meteor Society has released an analysis of the number of
> reports made to them by the public of fireballs over the last few
> years. They conclude that while there has been a definite increase,
> because of the increasing awareness and the technical tools to report
> such events, no conclusion can be made about whether this represents a
> real increase in the number of events:
>
> FireballTracking System Analysis.
> Analysis of the AMS Citizen Science BasedFireballTracking System.
> [url]http://www.amsmeteors.org/fireballs/fireball-tracking-system-
> analysis/[/url]
>
By Miriam Kramer, Staff Writer | September 30, 2013 03:18pm ET
<Quote>
"This was a very bright event," Bill Cooke of NASA's Meteoroid Environment
Office told Spaceweather.com. "Flares saturated our meteor cameras, and made
determination of the end point (the terminus of the fireball's flight
through the atmosphere) virtually impossible. Judging from the brightness,
we are dealing with a meter class object."</quote>
http://www.space.com/23001-meteor-fireball-ohio-video.html
By Deborah Byrd in
BLOGS | EARTH | HUMAN WORLD on Sep 28, 2013
U.S. sees another bright fireball on September 27.
<Quote>
September 2013 has been busy for sightings of bright fireballs. The one at
11:33 p.m. local time on September 27 was the 14th fireball sighting in the
U.S. in September.
The American Meteor Society (AMS) has reported at least 373 reports of
another bright fireball – a very bright meteor, likely a small chunk of
natural incoming space debris – over the U.S. last night (September 27,
2013). These reports followed a similar event over approximately the same
area the day before (September 26). The AMS called the coincidence of two
bright fireballs, or bright meteors, spotted over approximately the same
region on consecutive days "surprising." Witnesses from Georgia, Illinois,
Indiana, Kentucky, Maryland, North Carolina, New York, Ohio, Pennsylvania,
Tennessee, Virginia, Wisconsin and West Virginia reported a bright light
moving across the night sky on September 27 at around 11:33 p.m. local time,
according to the AMS.
Fireball might sound ominous, but it is just the word astronomers use to
mean bright meteor. As seen from a whole-Earth perspective, fireballs are
seen often. It’s unusual to have two appear on consecutive nights over the
same region, however.
September 2013 has been a busy month for sightings of bright meteors,
according to the AMS. Last night’s event marks the 14th fireball sighting
with at least 25 witnesses in September, the most ever since the AMS started
recording sightings online, they say.</quote>
http://earthsky.org/earth/u-s-midwest-sees-another-bright-fireball
The coincidences keep building and building ...
Bob Clark
--
Single-stage-to-orbit was already shown possible 50 years ago
with the Titan II first stage.
In fact, contrary to popular belief SSTO's are actually easy.
Just use the most efficient engines and stages at the same time,
and the result will automatically be SSTO.
Blog: Http://Exoscientist.blogspot.com
Chris L Peterson
Oct 3, 2013, 9:51:46 AM10/3/13
to
On Thu, 3 Oct 2013 07:21:18 -0400, "Robert Clark"
<rgrego...@yaSPAMBLOCKhoo.com> wrote:
>The coincidences keep building and building ...
No.
<rgrego...@yaSPAMBLOCKhoo.com> wrote:
>The coincidences keep building and building ...
David Staup
Oct 3, 2013, 3:28:55 PM10/3/13
to
On 2/28/2013 1:43 PM, Brad Guth wrote:
> On Feb 28, 11:38 am, Robert Clark <rgregorycl...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>> On Feb 27, 1:33 pm, j...@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>> In sci.physics Robert Clark <rgregorycl...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>
>>>> That video I linked to previously and ones like it may also be able
>>>> to address this question:
>>
>>>> An Asteroid's Parting Shot.
>>>> By Phil Plait
>>>> Posted Tuesday, Feb. 19, 2013, at 8:00 AM
>>>> http://www.slate.com/blogs/bad_astronomy/2013/02/19/near_earth_astero...
>>
>>>> The video shows 2012 DA14 slowing moving through the frame, and
>>>> meteors and artificial satellites streaking rapidly through the frame.
>>>> Assuming we are able to distinguish the satellites, perhaps by
>>>> knowing already their positions, perhaps we can determine if the
>>>> number of meteors shown here are higher than normal.
>>>> Better would be longer exposures that include at least the time
>>>> period of the Russian meteor impact.
>>
>>>> Bob Clark
>>
>>> While people here have been speculating all sorts of nonsense, astronomers
>>> from the University of Antioquia in Medellin, Colombia have figured out
>>> where the Russian meteor came from and that it has no relationship to
>>> the other close passing asteroid.
>>
>>> http://www.space.com/19974-russian-meteor-explosion-origin-size.html
>>
>> The Fireballs of February.
>> Feb. 22, 2012
>> ...
>> "They all hail from the asteroid belt—but not from a single location
>> in the asteroid belt," he says. "There is no common source for these
>> fireballs, which is puzzling."
>> "This isn't the first time sky watchers have noticed odd fireballs in
>> February. In fact, the "Fireballs of February" are a bit of a legend
>> in meteor circles.
>> "Brown explains: "Back in the 1960s and 70s, amateur astronomers
>> noticed an increase in the number of bright, sound-producing deep-
>> penetrating fireballs during the month of February. The numbers seemed
>> significant, especially when you consider that there are few people
>> outside at night in winter. Follow-up studies in the late 1980s
>> suggested no big increase in the rate of February fireballs.
>> Nevertheless, we've always wondered if something was going on."
>> "Indeed, a 1990 study by astronomer Ian Holliday suggests that the
>> 'February Fireballs' are real. He analyzed photographic records of
>> about a thousand fireballs from the 1970s and 80s and found evidence
>> for a fireball stream intersecting Earth's orbit in February. He also
>> found signs of fireball streams in late summer and fall. The results
>> are controversial, however. Even Halliday recognized some big
>> statistical uncertainties in his results."
>> ...http://science.nasa.gov/science-news/science-at-nasa/2012/22feb_febru...
>>
>> Note this was from last year, not this year in regard to this
>> February's unusual meteor and asteroid encounters. But what's key is
>> the article notes this has been noticed in other February's.
>> The article suggests greater number of fireballs in February. It also
>> mentions they are typically slow, long-lasting, and penetrate deep in
>> the atmosphere. I don't know about the slow part, but the long-lasting
>> and deep penetration aspects could be due to larger meteors during
>> February's.
>> could result in rather close approaches on the second crossing as
>> well:
>>
>> On Feb 26, 1:56 pm, will...@cfa.harvard.edu (Steve Willner) wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>> ...
>>
>>>> Does this mean there are two close approaches per orbit? It doesn't
>>>> necessarily have to be since where the two orbits "cross" does not
>>>> mean the two bodies have to be there at the same time.
>>
>>> Yes, exactly. Typically one body will be far away when the other is
>>> near a crossing point.
>>
>>>> if they are close at one "crossing" point, they should be
>>>> relatively close at the other.
>>
>>> About half a day away at the next crossing point, given the period of
>>> 366.24 days. That's about 400 Earth radii if I've done the
>>> arithmetic right. The distance is cumulative, so a simple estimate
>>> is that it will take another 366 years (365 orbits for the asteroid)
>>> before there's another close approach. However, the recent Earth
>>> encounter must have changed the orbit, so the simple estimate is
>>> probably wrong. There are also likely to be non-gravitational
>>> effects. This object is probably not one to worry about in the near
>>> term, but this sort of rough estimate is no substitute for a proper
>>> orbit calculation.
>>
>> This could explain the observation of Halliday that there seems to be
>> a statistical increase also in late Summer and Fall.
>>
>> In any case, the Air Force needs to release its satellite detections
>> of these fireballs. For one thing they might be able to detect the
>> meteors before they have any appreciable interaction with the
>> atmosphere. For large meteors, of oblong shape, the atmospheric
>> interaction could alter their direction, thus giving a misleading
>> interpretation of their original orbits.
>>
>> For many people the Air Force not sharing all the technical means at
>> its disposal led to the loss of the shuttle Columbia crew. It must not
>> be said that its keeping its meteor detections capability secret led
>> to the loss of an entire city.
>>
>> Bob Clark
>
> Since when do mainstream oligarchs care about the rest of us?
>
Yo goofy
NO ONE here is going to respond to your silliness
everyone knows about GUTH VENUS
LLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLL
> On Feb 28, 11:38 am, Robert Clark <rgregorycl...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>> On Feb 27, 1:33 pm, j...@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>> In sci.physics Robert Clark <rgregorycl...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>
>>>> That video I linked to previously and ones like it may also be able
>>>> to address this question:
>>
>>>> An Asteroid's Parting Shot.
>>>> By Phil Plait
>>>> Posted Tuesday, Feb. 19, 2013, at 8:00 AM
>>>> http://www.slate.com/blogs/bad_astronomy/2013/02/19/near_earth_astero...
>>
>>>> The video shows 2012 DA14 slowing moving through the frame, and
>>>> meteors and artificial satellites streaking rapidly through the frame.
>>>> Assuming we are able to distinguish the satellites, perhaps by
>>>> knowing already their positions, perhaps we can determine if the
>>>> number of meteors shown here are higher than normal.
>>>> Better would be longer exposures that include at least the time
>>>> period of the Russian meteor impact.
>>
>>>> Bob Clark
>>
>>> While people here have been speculating all sorts of nonsense, astronomers
>>> from the University of Antioquia in Medellin, Colombia have figured out
>>> where the Russian meteor came from and that it has no relationship to
>>> the other close passing asteroid.
>>
>>> http://www.space.com/19974-russian-meteor-explosion-origin-size.html
>>
>> The Fireballs of February.
>> Feb. 22, 2012
>> ...
>> "They all hail from the asteroid belt—but not from a single location
>> in the asteroid belt," he says. "There is no common source for these
>> fireballs, which is puzzling."
>> "This isn't the first time sky watchers have noticed odd fireballs in
>> February. In fact, the "Fireballs of February" are a bit of a legend
>> in meteor circles.
>> "Brown explains: "Back in the 1960s and 70s, amateur astronomers
>> noticed an increase in the number of bright, sound-producing deep-
>> penetrating fireballs during the month of February. The numbers seemed
>> significant, especially when you consider that there are few people
>> outside at night in winter. Follow-up studies in the late 1980s
>> suggested no big increase in the rate of February fireballs.
>> Nevertheless, we've always wondered if something was going on."
>> "Indeed, a 1990 study by astronomer Ian Holliday suggests that the
>> 'February Fireballs' are real. He analyzed photographic records of
>> about a thousand fireballs from the 1970s and 80s and found evidence
>> for a fireball stream intersecting Earth's orbit in February. He also
>> found signs of fireball streams in late summer and fall. The results
>> are controversial, however. Even Halliday recognized some big
>> statistical uncertainties in his results."
>> ...http://science.nasa.gov/science-news/science-at-nasa/2012/22feb_febru...
>>
>> Note this was from last year, not this year in regard to this
>> February's unusual meteor and asteroid encounters. But what's key is
>> the article notes this has been noticed in other February's.
>> The article suggests greater number of fireballs in February. It also
>> mentions they are typically slow, long-lasting, and penetrate deep in
>> the atmosphere. I don't know about the slow part, but the long-lasting
>> and deep penetration aspects could be due to larger meteors during
>> February's.
>> If there is an association with the 2012 DA14 asteroid, then since
>> it has approximately a year long orbit, this could explain why the
>> fireballs are seen frequently in February. Note it was discovered
>> last year in February also during a close approach.
>> Also notable as Steve Willner mentioned the two orbital crossings
>> it has approximately a year long orbit, this could explain why the
>> fireballs are seen frequently in February. Note it was discovered
>> last year in February also during a close approach.
>> could result in rather close approaches on the second crossing as
>> well:
>>
>> On Feb 26, 1:56 pm, will...@cfa.harvard.edu (Steve Willner) wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>> ...
>>
>>>> Does this mean there are two close approaches per orbit? It doesn't
>>>> necessarily have to be since where the two orbits "cross" does not
>>>> mean the two bodies have to be there at the same time.
>>
>>> Yes, exactly. Typically one body will be far away when the other is
>>> near a crossing point.
>>
>>>> if they are close at one "crossing" point, they should be
>>>> relatively close at the other.
>>
>>> About half a day away at the next crossing point, given the period of
>>> 366.24 days. That's about 400 Earth radii if I've done the
>>> arithmetic right. The distance is cumulative, so a simple estimate
>>> is that it will take another 366 years (365 orbits for the asteroid)
>>> before there's another close approach. However, the recent Earth
>>> encounter must have changed the orbit, so the simple estimate is
>>> probably wrong. There are also likely to be non-gravitational
>>> effects. This object is probably not one to worry about in the near
>>> term, but this sort of rough estimate is no substitute for a proper
>>> orbit calculation.
>>
>> This could explain the observation of Halliday that there seems to be
>> a statistical increase also in late Summer and Fall.
>>
>> In any case, the Air Force needs to release its satellite detections
>> of these fireballs. For one thing they might be able to detect the
>> meteors before they have any appreciable interaction with the
>> atmosphere. For large meteors, of oblong shape, the atmospheric
>> interaction could alter their direction, thus giving a misleading
>> interpretation of their original orbits.
>>
>> For many people the Air Force not sharing all the technical means at
>> its disposal led to the loss of the shuttle Columbia crew. It must not
>> be said that its keeping its meteor detections capability secret led
>> to the loss of an entire city.
>>
>> Bob Clark
>
> Since when do mainstream oligarchs care about the rest of us?
>
Yo goofy
NO ONE here is going to respond to your silliness
everyone knows about GUTH VENUS
LLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLL
Mike Collins
Oct 3, 2013, 4:21:02 PM10/3/13
to
David Staup
Oct 4, 2013, 12:17:54 PM10/4/13
to
snicker
liberal idiot to boot
that's 2 strikes
Mike Collins
Oct 4, 2013, 6:26:36 PM10/4/13
to
made in February.
How is this a triumph?
And I'm not a liberal I'm a socialist.
Robert Clark
Oct 14, 2013, 5:07:00 PM10/14/13
to
"Robert Clark" <rgrego...@yaSPAMBLOCKhoo.com> wrote in message
news:l2jk18$pu$8...@dont-email.me...
> another bright fireball - a very bright meteor, likely a small chunk of
> natural incoming space debris - over the U.S. last night (September 27,
Think - Wired Science.
BY ADAM MANN 10.07.13 9:30 AM
<Quote>
The latest analysis of the bollide that burst over Chelyabinsk, Russia in
February suggests that the risk from such airbursts - which occur when
friction in our atmosphere heats up a meteor - may be greater than
previously thought.<Quote>
http://www.wired.com/wiredscience/2013/10/chelyabinsk-frequent-impact/
Whether it's that impacts of such large bolides occur more frequently than
we thought or if there is an unusual increase just recently, both
possibilities are worrisome.
news:l2jk18$pu$8...@dont-email.me...
> "Robert Clark" <rgrego...@gmail.com> wrote in message
> news:ac10fc90-14af-457b...@a8g2000yqp.googlegroups.com...
> On Mar 27, 1:17 pm, Robert Clark <rgregorycl...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>> Last weekends meteor over the east coast U.S. was not uncommon
>> according to NASA:
>>
>> Boulder-Size Asteroid Caused Friday's East Coast Meteor, NASA Says.
>> By Mike Wall | SPACE.com - Sat, Mar 23, 2013
> news:ac10fc90-14af-457b...@a8g2000yqp.googlegroups.com...
> On Mar 27, 1:17 pm, Robert Clark <rgregorycl...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>> Last weekends meteor over the east coast U.S. was not uncommon
>> according to NASA:
>>
>> Boulder-Size Asteroid Caused Friday's East Coast Meteor, NASA Says.
> natural incoming space debris - over the U.S. last night (September 27,
> 2013). These reports followed a similar event over approximately the same
> area the day before (September 26). The AMS called the coincidence of two
> bright fireballs, or bright meteors, spotted over approximately the same
> region on consecutive days "surprising." Witnesses from Georgia, Illinois,
> Indiana, Kentucky, Maryland, North Carolina, New York, Ohio, Pennsylvania,
> Tennessee, Virginia, Wisconsin and West Virginia reported a bright light
> moving across the night sky on September 27 at around 11:33 p.m. local
> time, according to the AMS.
> Fireball might sound ominous, but it is just the word astronomers use to
> mean bright meteor. As seen from a whole-Earth perspective, fireballs are
> seen often. It's unusual to have two appear on consecutive nights over the
> same region, however.
> September 2013 has been a busy month for sightings of bright meteors,
> according to the AMS. Last night's event marks the 14th fireball sighting
> with at least 25 witnesses in September, the most ever since the AMS
> started recording sightings online, they say.</quote>
> http://earthsky.org/earth/u-s-midwest-sees-another-bright-fireball
>
>
> The coincidences keep building and building ...
>
Russian Meteor Explosion Might Mean Earth Gets Hit More Often Than We
> area the day before (September 26). The AMS called the coincidence of two
> bright fireballs, or bright meteors, spotted over approximately the same
> region on consecutive days "surprising." Witnesses from Georgia, Illinois,
> Indiana, Kentucky, Maryland, North Carolina, New York, Ohio, Pennsylvania,
> Tennessee, Virginia, Wisconsin and West Virginia reported a bright light
> moving across the night sky on September 27 at around 11:33 p.m. local
> time, according to the AMS.
> Fireball might sound ominous, but it is just the word astronomers use to
> mean bright meteor. As seen from a whole-Earth perspective, fireballs are
> seen often. It's unusual to have two appear on consecutive nights over the
> same region, however.
> September 2013 has been a busy month for sightings of bright meteors,
> according to the AMS. Last night's event marks the 14th fireball sighting
> with at least 25 witnesses in September, the most ever since the AMS
> started recording sightings online, they say.</quote>
> http://earthsky.org/earth/u-s-midwest-sees-another-bright-fireball
>
>
> The coincidences keep building and building ...
>
Think - Wired Science.
BY ADAM MANN 10.07.13 9:30 AM
<Quote>
The latest analysis of the bollide that burst over Chelyabinsk, Russia in
February suggests that the risk from such airbursts - which occur when
friction in our atmosphere heats up a meteor - may be greater than
previously thought.<Quote>
http://www.wired.com/wiredscience/2013/10/chelyabinsk-frequent-impact/
Whether it's that impacts of such large bolides occur more frequently than
we thought or if there is an unusual increase just recently, both
possibilities are worrisome.
Chris L Peterson
Oct 15, 2013, 9:20:55 AM10/15/13
to
On Mon, 14 Oct 2013 17:07:00 -0400, "Robert Clark"
<rgrego...@yaSPAMBLOCKhoo.com> wrote:
> Whether it's that impacts of such large bolides occur more frequently than
>we thought or if there is an unusual increase just recently, both
>possibilities are worrisome.
There is no increase in activity. And even if our understanding
<rgrego...@yaSPAMBLOCKhoo.com> wrote:
> Whether it's that impacts of such large bolides occur more frequently than
>we thought or if there is an unusual increase just recently, both
>possibilities are worrisome.
improves and we recognize that the natural impact rate is somewhat
higher than previously believed, this isn't something to worry much
about. The incidence is still low.
Robert Clark
Nov 7, 2013, 8:47:50 AM11/7/13
to
"Robert Clark" <rgrego...@yaSPAMBLOCKhoo.com> wrote in message
news:l3hmfc$aei$9...@dont-email.me...
>> ...
Quirin Schiermeier
06 November 2013
[quote]The asteroid that exploded on 15 February this year near the city of
Chelyabinsk in the Urals region of Russia was the largest to crash to Earth
since 1908, when an object hit Tunguska in Siberia. Using video recordings
of the event, scientists have now reconstructed the asteroid's properties
and its trajectory through Earth's atmosphere. The risk of similar objects
hitting our planet may be ten times larger than previously thought, they now
warn.
[url]http://www.nature.com/news/risk-of-massive-asteroid-strike-underestimated-1.14114[/url][/quote]
DEVASTATING Chelyabinsk METEOR STRIKES: '7x as likely' as thought.
NASA's checked its space rock maths and it's not good news
By Iain Thomson, 6th November 2013
[quote]NASA has revealed new research on the Chelyabinsk meteorite that
exploded over Russia in February, and the findings aren't good: not only
does it look like the astronomic models about the number of similar-sized
things reaching Earth are wrong, but also the damage they can do is much
greater than expected.
"If you look at the number of impacts detected by US government sensors over
the past few decades you find the impact rate of kiloton-class objects is
greater than would be indicated by the telescopic surveys," said Bill Cooke,
meteoroid environment office lead at NASA's Marshall Space Flight Center at
a press conference on Wednesday.
[url]http://www.theregister.co.uk/2013/11/06/chelyabinsksized_meteors_impacts_seven_times_more_common_than_first_thought/[/url][/quote]
Robert Clark
Sep 13, 2014, 2:01:14 PM9/13/14
to
There was another close asteroid flyby last week:
Asteroid the size of a house to pass ‘close’ to Earth, Nasa says.
The space object is the same size as the one that exploded over Russia in
2013.
ADAM WITHNALL Author Biography Sunday 07 September 2014
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/science/asteroid-the-size-of-a-house-to-pass-close-to-earth-nasa-says-9716847.html
There was a fireball over Spain the next day. The Spain fireball is referred
to as a "super bolide" here:
Spain Super Bolide 08SEP2014
Barcelona, Spain Super Bolide 0655 am 08SEP2014
Meteorites likely produced!
http://lunarmeteorit...-08sep2014.html
In the second video on this page it looks really huge. Anyone see any
estimates on its size?
I'm in the distinct minority in still thinking there is a connection between
asteroid close approaches and meteorite fireballs, like in the Russian
meteorite case and in this Spanish case.
Bob Clark
------------------------------------------------------------------
==============================================================
"Robert Clark" wrote in message news:l5g5od$ep1$9...@dont-email.me...
==============================================================
Asteroid the size of a house to pass ‘close’ to Earth, Nasa says.
The space object is the same size as the one that exploded over Russia in
2013.
ADAM WITHNALL Author Biography Sunday 07 September 2014
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/science/asteroid-the-size-of-a-house-to-pass-close-to-earth-nasa-says-9716847.html
There was a fireball over Spain the next day. The Spain fireball is referred
to as a "super bolide" here:
Spain Super Bolide 08SEP2014
Barcelona, Spain Super Bolide 0655 am 08SEP2014
Meteorites likely produced!
http://lunarmeteorit...-08sep2014.html
In the second video on this page it looks really huge. Anyone see any
estimates on its size?
I'm in the distinct minority in still thinking there is a connection between
asteroid close approaches and meteorite fireballs, like in the Russian
meteorite case and in this Spanish case.
Bob Clark
------------------------------------------------------------------
Single-stage-to-orbit was already shown possible 50 years ago
with the Titan II first stage.
In fact, contrary to popular belief SSTO's are actually easy.
Just use the most efficient engines and stages at the same time,
and the result will automatically be SSTO.
Blog: Http://Exoscientist.blogspot.com
------------------------------------------------------------------
with the Titan II first stage.
In fact, contrary to popular belief SSTO's are actually easy.
Just use the most efficient engines and stages at the same time,
and the result will automatically be SSTO.
Blog: Http://Exoscientist.blogspot.com
==============================================================
"Robert Clark" wrote in message news:l5g5od$ep1$9...@dont-email.me...
Chris L Peterson
Sep 14, 2014, 9:33:20 AM9/14/14
to
On Sat, 13 Sep 2014 14:01:14 -0400, "Robert Clark"
<rgrego...@gmSPAMBLOCKail.com> wrote:
>I'm in the distinct minority in still thinking there is a connection between
>asteroid close approaches and meteorite fireballs, like in the Russian
>meteorite case and in this Spanish case.
In neither case was there any connection between meteors and large
<rgrego...@gmSPAMBLOCKail.com> wrote:
>I'm in the distinct minority in still thinking there is a connection between
>asteroid close approaches and meteorite fireballs, like in the Russian
>meteorite case and in this Spanish case.
asteroids observed near Earth. This is 100% certain, as the orbits are
known.
Robert Clark
Sep 14, 2014, 10:25:19 AM9/14/14
to
Just because we don't understand how there can be a connection between two
events does not mean there can not be one. The conclusion that the events
were connected was based on the unlikelihood of their occurring in close
proximity in time. IF it continues to happen that close flybys are
accompanied by large meteorite fireballs then that would lead to a search
for a mechanism to explain how they could be related despite their appearing
from different directions in space.
Bob Clark
------------------------------------------------------------------
Single-stage-to-orbit was already shown possible 50 years ago
with the Titan II first stage.
In fact, contrary to popular belief SSTO's are actually easy.
Just use the most efficient engines and stages at the same time,
and the result will automatically be SSTO.
Blog: Http://Exoscientist.blogspot.com
------------------------------------------------------------------
"Chris L Peterson" wrote in message
news:v16b1a195h8ktgp7e...@4ax.com...
events does not mean there can not be one. The conclusion that the events
were connected was based on the unlikelihood of their occurring in close
proximity in time. IF it continues to happen that close flybys are
accompanied by large meteorite fireballs then that would lead to a search
for a mechanism to explain how they could be related despite their appearing
from different directions in space.
Bob Clark
------------------------------------------------------------------
Single-stage-to-orbit was already shown possible 50 years ago
with the Titan II first stage.
In fact, contrary to popular belief SSTO's are actually easy.
Just use the most efficient engines and stages at the same time,
and the result will automatically be SSTO.
Blog: Http://Exoscientist.blogspot.com
------------------------------------------------------------------
news:v16b1a195h8ktgp7e...@4ax.com...
Poutnik
Sep 14, 2014, 10:32:35 AM9/14/14
to
Dne 14.9.2014 v 16:25 Robert Clark napsal(a):
probably related.
As is is very common small objects progresively desintegrates
creating debris. Many meteoroids are some debris of larger comets,
following their orbits.
If they do not share them, they were not.
--
Poutnik
> Just because we don't understand how there can be a connection between
> two events does not mean there can not be one. The conclusion that the
> events were connected was based on the unlikelihood of their occurring
> in close proximity in time. IF it continues to happen that close flybys
> are accompanied by large meteorite fireballs then that would lead to a
> search for a mechanism to explain how they could be related despite
> their appearing from different directions in space.
>
>
> Bob Clark
>
If they shared the similar orbit characteristics, than they were very
> two events does not mean there can not be one. The conclusion that the
> events were connected was based on the unlikelihood of their occurring
> in close proximity in time. IF it continues to happen that close flybys
> are accompanied by large meteorite fireballs then that would lead to a
> search for a mechanism to explain how they could be related despite
> their appearing from different directions in space.
>
>
> Bob Clark
>
probably related.
As is is very common small objects progresively desintegrates
creating debris. Many meteoroids are some debris of larger comets,
following their orbits.
If they do not share them, they were not.
--
Poutnik
Chris L Peterson
Sep 14, 2014, 11:30:12 AM9/14/14
to
On Sun, 14 Sep 2014 10:25:19 -0400, "Robert Clark"
<rgrego...@gmSPAMBLOCKail.com> wrote:
>Just because we don't understand how there can be a connection between two
>events does not mean there can not be one.
Sorry, but orbital dynamics is something that is extremely well
<rgrego...@gmSPAMBLOCKail.com> wrote:
>Just because we don't understand how there can be a connection between two
>events does not mean there can not be one.
understood. You might as well claim that a meteor was caused by the
conjunction of Saturn and Venus.
>The conclusion that the events
>were connected was based on the unlikelihood of their occurring in close
>proximity in time. IF it continues to happen that close flybys are
>accompanied by large meteorite fireballs then that would lead to a search
>for a mechanism to explain how they could be related despite their appearing
>from different directions in space.
year. Massive fireballs happen every few days. You are falling victim
to a type of observation bias.
oriel36
Sep 14, 2014, 1:51:58 PM9/14/14
to
On Sunday, September 14, 2014 4:30:12 PM UTC+1, Chris L Peterson wrote:
> On Sun, 14 Sep 2014 10:25:19 -0400, "Robert Clark"
>
> <rgrego...@gmSPAMBLOCKail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> >Just because we don't understand how there can be a connection between two
>
> >events does not mean there can not be one.
>
>
>
> Sorry, but orbital dynamics is something that is extremely well
>
> understood.
Pity the world remains mired with intellectual frauds like yourself Peterson in that you represent a cult with an inability to appreciate basic orbital features such as the Earth moving through space and turning to the Sun at the same time as a function of that orbital motion, even with imaging showing this to be a 100% certainty -
> On Sun, 14 Sep 2014 10:25:19 -0400, "Robert Clark"
>
> <rgrego...@gmSPAMBLOCKail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> >Just because we don't understand how there can be a connection between two
>
> >events does not mean there can not be one.
>
>
>
> Sorry, but orbital dynamics is something that is extremely well
>
> understood.
http://www.terrapapers.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/10/2007-0823uranus1.jpg
Orbital dynamics actually means appreciating features of planetary motion from observations and omitting that annual surface rotation and aside from daily rotation to the Sun is incredible.
Stephen Paul
Sep 19, 2014, 3:46:50 PM9/19/14
to
On 9/14/2014 11:30 AM, Chris L Peterson wrote:
>
> Asteroid flybys happen several times each
> year. Massive fireballs happen every few days
>
I witnessed a small fireball last night here in the Northeast US around
>
> Asteroid flybys happen several times each
> year. Massive fireballs happen every few days
>
9PM or so EDT. It was headed due south. I believe it a fireball because
it had a longer duration than a typical meteor, it burned brighter, and
it appeared to move a little slower.
I just happened to step out for some air. Luck of the draw.
Enjoy!
-Steve
Dr J R Stockton
Sep 21, 2014, 2:50:50 PM9/21/14
to
In sci.astro.amateur message <m96dnZ2RiMm1FYHJnZ2dnUU7-WWdnZ2d@giganews.
com>, Fri, 19 Sep 2014 15:46:50, Stephen Paul
<smarshallpaul@_gmail_.com> posted:
You are sure that it was not a
<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Satellite_flare> ?
--
(c) John Stockton, nr London, UK. Mail via homepage. Turnpike v6.05 MIME.
Web <http://www.merlyn.demon.co.uk/> - FAQqish topics, acronyms and links;
Astro stuff via astron-1.htm, gravity0.htm ; quotings.htm, pascal.htm, etc.
No Encoding. Quotes before replies. Snip well. Write clearly. Mail no News.
com>, Fri, 19 Sep 2014 15:46:50, Stephen Paul
<smarshallpaul@_gmail_.com> posted:
<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Satellite_flare> ?
--
(c) John Stockton, nr London, UK. Mail via homepage. Turnpike v6.05 MIME.
Web <http://www.merlyn.demon.co.uk/> - FAQqish topics, acronyms and links;
Astro stuff via astron-1.htm, gravity0.htm ; quotings.htm, pascal.htm, etc.
No Encoding. Quotes before replies. Snip well. Write clearly. Mail no News.
palsing
Sep 21, 2014, 10:07:10 PM9/21/14
to
On Sunday, September 21, 2014 11:50:50 AM UTC-7, Dr J R Stockton wrote:
> In sci.astro.amateur message <m96dnZ2RiMm1FYHJnZ2dnUU7-WWdnZ2d@giganews.
>
> com>, Fri, 19 Sep 2014 15:46:50, Stephen Paul
>
> <smarshallpaul@_gmail_.com> posted:
>
>
>
> >On 9/14/2014 11:30 AM, Chris L Peterson wrote:
>
> >>
>
> >> Asteroid flybys happen several times each
>
> >> year. Massive fireballs happen every few days
>
> >>
>
> >
>
> >I witnessed a small fireball last night here in the Northeast US around
>
> >9PM or so EDT. It was headed due south. I believe it a fireball because
>
> >it had a longer duration than a typical meteor, it burned brighter, and
>
> >it appeared to move a little slower.
>
> >
>
> >I just happened to step out for some air. Luck of the draw.
>
>
>
> You are sure that it was not a
>
> <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Satellite_flare> ?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x1qkmrTIAKk
> In sci.astro.amateur message <m96dnZ2RiMm1FYHJnZ2dnUU7-WWdnZ2d@giganews.
>
> com>, Fri, 19 Sep 2014 15:46:50, Stephen Paul
>
> <smarshallpaul@_gmail_.com> posted:
>
>
>
> >On 9/14/2014 11:30 AM, Chris L Peterson wrote:
>
> >>
>
> >> Asteroid flybys happen several times each
>
> >> year. Massive fireballs happen every few days
>
> >>
>
> >
>
> >I witnessed a small fireball last night here in the Northeast US around
>
> >9PM or so EDT. It was headed due south. I believe it a fireball because
>
> >it had a longer duration than a typical meteor, it burned brighter, and
>
> >it appeared to move a little slower.
>
> >
>
> >I just happened to step out for some air. Luck of the draw.
>
>
>
> You are sure that it was not a
>
> <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Satellite_flare> ?
Stephen Paul
Sep 23, 2014, 6:23:59 PM9/23/14
to
On 9/21/2014 10:07 PM, palsing wrote:
> On Sunday, September 21, 2014 11:50:50 AM UTC-7, Dr J R Stockton wrote:
>>
>> com>, Fri, 19 Sep 2014 15:46:50, Stephen Paul
> On Sunday, September 21, 2014 11:50:50 AM UTC-7, Dr J R Stockton wrote:
>>
>> com>, Fri, 19 Sep 2014 15:46:50, Stephen Paul
>>> I witnessed a small fireball last night here in the Northeast US around
>>
>>> 9PM or so EDT. It was headed due south. I believe it a fireball because
>>
>>> it had a longer duration than a typical meteor, it burned brighter, and
>>
>>> it appeared to move a little slower.
>>
>>>
>>
>>> I just happened to step out for some air. Luck of the draw.
>>
>>
>>
>> You are sure that it was not a
>>
>> <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Satellite_flare> ?
>
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x1qkmrTIAKk
>
Yeah, I thought about it being an Iridium flare later.
>>
>>> 9PM or so EDT. It was headed due south. I believe it a fireball because
>>
>>> it had a longer duration than a typical meteor, it burned brighter, and
>>
>>> it appeared to move a little slower.
>>
>>>
>>
>>> I just happened to step out for some air. Luck of the draw.
>>
>>
>>
>> You are sure that it was not a
>>
>> <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Satellite_flare> ?
>
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x1qkmrTIAKk
>
Probably right.
-Steve
0 new messages