Can the NASA statement be used to falsify their own take on the origin of planets?
NASA statement on Russian meteor: "According to NASA scientists, the trajectory of the Russian meteorite was significantly different than the trajectory of the asteroid 2012 DA14, making it a completely unrelated object. Information is still being collected about the Russian meteorite and analysis is preliminary at this point. In videos of the meteor, it is seen to pass from left to right in front of the rising sun, which means it was traveling from north to south. Asteroid DA14's trajectory is in the opposite direction, from south to north."
If in the event of a catastrophic planetary event such as; one which dislodges large chuncks of material from a planet as proposed by Talbott and Thornhill or an exploding planet as Tom VanFlandern proposes, or even the standard extinction event impact,, wouldn't debris be scattered in many directions into space? Wouldn't this open the possibility of orbits or trajectories in opposite directions bringing objects back to the point of origin from opposite directions? Just a thought. d...z
...
nick c
Re: Feb 15 Meteorite(s) hit Russia - Analysis
Zane,
Wouldn't this open the possibility of orbits or trajectories in opposite directions bringing objects back to the point of origin from opposite directions? Just a thought. d...z
nick c wrote: Perhaps 2012 DA14 had some accompanying debris and one of these pieces did a partial orbit of the Earth before entering the upper atmosphere from the opposite direction of the motion of 2012 DA14.
Sparky
Re: Feb 15 Meteorite(s) hit Russia - Analysis
distinct red patches in the trail.
Beautiful images, but i think the red is from the rising sun....
**************************************
A demonstration of light scatter through lens material.
Good find... Something to compare with..
Eldie_Essay
Can a 10 ton meteor produce that explosion electrically?
I have wondered about the revised figures of the meteor. Initially the estimate was around a 10 ton bolide. This was revised to 10,000 tons! Here is what I wonder: if we keep the original estimate, could the EU theory account fur the energy released? Obviously the standard view could not account for it, which is why they had to revise their figures. Everybody is scratching their heads wondering where in the hell the meteor went. Everybody expects large fragments to have reached the ground, yet only 50 some odd pebble-sized pieces have been found but even these have not been officially confirmed, the claim coming from one university. Also, even the crater on the lake is in dispute. There is no evidence that the meteor had anything to do with its formation.
Now, if you bring up the possibility of the meteor being electrically destroyed, people are understandably going to have a hard time swallowing that. After all, 10,000 tons of rock disintegrating with nary a trace in a matter of seconds is a hard pill to swallow. But so is 30 Hiroshima bombs worth of energy.
When I first heard about this meteor, I breathed a sigh of relief because my unqualified assessment was that it was electrically destroyed and I was glad to see that Earth's electrical defenses were working and up to the task of "bug zapping" any large meteor that threatens our existence. I was pleased tn see that only localized effects (the shock wave) resulted from such events and I went to bed secure that the scientists were full of $#!+ about the possibility of global destruction being caused by a large meteor. In other words, the danger does not come from the meteor itself, but from Earth's electrical response to it. If we could see a large rock coming from far off, and pin-point where it will strike, we could theoretically evacuate the local area, let the Earth do its zapping thing, and then the people could come back in and rebuild, saving lives.
But then I got to thinking, "What if the revised numbers are wrong because they are only taking into account non-electrical forces? What if this meteor was, in actuality a 10 ton bolide, as originally thought? What if a 10 ton bolide produces a 30 H-bomb electrical response? Wouldn't that mean that a 10,000 ton bolide would produce a 30,000 H-bomb electrical response?" Perish the thought. I certainly hope the revised numbers are accurate.
dahlenaz
Re: Feb 15 Meteorite(s) hit Russia - Analysis
nick c wrote: Zane,
Wouldn't this open the possibility of orbits or trajectories in opposite directions bringing objects back to the point of origin from opposite directions? Just a thought. d...z
nick c wrote: Perhaps 2012 DA14 had some accompanying debris and one of these pieces did a partial orbit of the Earth before entering the upper atmosphere from the opposite direction of the motion of 2012 DA14.
I am glad you elaborated on the possibility. I do not know the details of earthly capture or how close an object needs to pass before that could happen. This should've been thought of by the NASA/space people before drawing their conclusion,,, but maybe they did not. According to the report you mentioned, the asteroid was anticipated to pass later the same evening. http://rt.com/news/meteorite-crash-ural ... binsk-283/
Does the time separations of each of the other sightings lend support to this? d...z
...
nick c
Re: Feb 15 Meteorite(s) hit Russia - Analysis
I do not know what NASA is thinking? but they are asking the public to accept a remarkable coincidence aren't they? On the same day as the scheduled close passage of a dangerously large chunk of rock, Russia gets hit with one of the most spectacular meteors in decades.
Dotini
Re: Feb 15 Meteorite(s) hit Russia - Analysis
nick c wrote: I do not know what NASA is thinking? but they are asking the public to accept a remarkable coincidence aren't they? On the same day as the scheduled close passage of a dangerously large chunk of rock, Russia gets hit with one of the most spectacular meteors in decades.
There is the suggestion that NASA did know of the impacting bolide, but was sworn to secrecy by military regulations.
Respectfully yours, Steve
seasmith
Re: Feb 15 Meteorite(s) hit Russia - Analysis
Nick,
I think you were right on, early on about the same bolide group going into entry on opposite sides of earth's atmosphere.
What we know is that the smaller one passed through a ~couple layers, with varying EM/ES potentials.
It grew a luminous tail and so the extended trace, or 'pulse' had to have developed a dlpolarity; hence the so-called "tunnel diode" form. Whatever the size of the bolides, that mass will be in a state of high EM tension. If it blows, then the latent charge is diffused along with the debris blast. ªAs diode, its function is similar that of a Tesla spark-gap device. The heavy-duty Gunn diodes generate powerful microwaves, and more.
Don't think i would count on really Massive bolides having enough time to become ∑-overloaded, and initiate "Coulomb explosion".
I found a third video showing a meteor-to-ground (electrical?) connection. It is probably the best video of them all. I've put it up on my blog, along with screen captures:
Are all three of these videos showing the same artifacts? Methinks not.
CharlesChandler
Re: Feb 15 Meteorite(s) hit Russia - Analysis
Hey Folks!
Here's a link to the webpage I did recently on bolides: Meteoric Airbursts. In researching it, I found plenty of literature that certifies that there is charge separation between the bolide and the detached bow shock (including the coma). When the bolide breaks up, the separator fails, and an EMP is released, sometimes with enough power to make lights flicker. I don't know whether the EMP could have caused some of the damage, but I can definitely attest to the fact that sonic booms can break windows. I grew up in the vicinity of the Patuxent River Naval Air Station, and back in the Vietnam era, it was a very active base, and we heard sonic booms on a daily basis. And lots of people had to replace windows. It helps if the window is old, and has thinned out at the top. Modern 1/8" panes aren't going to break like that. Maybe that's what the Mythbusters tested. But if you fly an F-4 Phantom at Mach 2, below 500 feet, right over a bunch of old farmhouses, you can expect broken windows.
ElecGeekMom
Re: Feb 15 Meteorite(s) hit Russia - Analysis
Has anyone seen a diagram that shows trajectories for both objects?
justcurious
Re: Feb 15 Meteorite(s) hit Russia - Analysis
CharlesChandler wrote: Hey Folks!
Here's a link to the webpage I did recently on bolides: Meteoric Airbursts. In researching it, I found plenty of literature that certifies that there is charge separation between the bolide and the detached bow shock (including the coma). When the bolide breaks up, the separator fails, and an EMP is released, sometimes with enough power to make lights flicker. I don't know whether the EMP could have caused some of the damage, but I can definitely attest to the fact that sonic booms can break windows. I grew up in the vicinity of the Patuxent River Naval Air Station, and back in the Vietnam era, it was a very active base, and we heard sonic booms on a daily basis. And lots of people had to replace windows. It helps if the window is old, and has thinned out at the top. Modern 1/8" panes aren't going to break like that. Maybe that's what the Mythbusters tested. But if you fly an F-4 Phantom at Mach 2, below 500 feet, right over a bunch of old farmhouses, you can expect broken windows.
Charles.... There is one problem with your theory of an EMP explosion (and no shock wave). The explosive sound and blowing out of windows occurs many seconds after the flashes of light. On your write-up you state:
The popping sounds coincident with the break-up of the meteor prove that the sound isn't coming directly from the meteor itself, or the sound would have arrived long after (roughly 3 seconds for every kilometer of distance). Rather, the break-up generates an EM wave that propagates at the speed of light, and then is somehow converted back to mechanical energy near the observer
Would you mind elaborating on "somehow converted back to mechanical energy near the observer"?
also have I have a hard time understanding this:
The rapid movement of the electrons, with respect to the much more massive and slower moving ions, generates a sizable space charge (see e.g., Zel'dovich et al. (1967)). A transient electrical pulse is generated in response to the development of the space charge, and provided the resultant electrical field strength variations are large enough it is suggested, following Keay (1980), that they might trigger the generation of audible sounds through an observer localized transduction process. The shock wave is produced, Beech et al. (1999) suggest, during the catastrophic break-up of the parent meteoroid.
What is a space charge? Do you mean that charges are separated in time and hence creating a voltage potential? And that the resultng discharge or arcing causes sound? In the case of this meteor event, where do the electrons and ions come from? Do you mean that the meteor has one charge (for example negative) and the ionized air around it has another, or is it charge separation within the meteor itself being caused by some sort of induction? And what does "observer localized transduction process" mean?
You refer to sonic booms and fighter jets. I'm not an expert on sonic booms but I know a few things about wave propagation. It seems that the sonic booms from aircraft would be caused by the compression of waves, as long as the speed of the craft (or object) is moving relatively close to the speed of sound. At speeds much higher than the speed of sound, the effect goes away. Wikipedia states that "As the aircraft increases speed the shock cone gets tighter around the craft and becomes weaker to the point that at very high speeds and altitudes no boom is heard.".
Perhaps the meteor flying at supersonic speeds can create a sonic boom, however common sense tells me that it had something to do with the 20X Hiroshima explosion(s).
Regards,
Sam
Eldie_Essay
Fourth video showing connection found
The fourth video actually shows light going from the ground upward and from the meteor downward, until they meet in the middle and join, forming a pinched column. It's pretty spectacular footage.
dahlenaz
Re: Feb 15 Meteorite(s) hit Russia - Analysis
Here are some more details to consider. First off do we know for sure that the object stopped over russia? Look at how fast it was going and how high it appears while going out of sight based on the video from this angle.
I think the trajectory was NE to south west and the event was at 9:26am local time, so how does that compare time-wise with the event over Cuba at 0100 GMT the same morning? We've got to find some plots for these objects. d...z
... It turns out that meteors entering Earth's atmosphere cause ripples of infrasound to spread through the air of our planet. By analyzing infrasound records, it is possible to learn how long a meteor was in the air, which direction it traveled, and how much energy it unleashed.
The Russian meteor's infrasound signal was was the strongest ever detected by the CTBTO network. The furthest station to record the sub-audible sound was 15,000km away in Antarctica.
Listen to the infrasound recording, sped up 135x into the range of human hearing. Play it Western Ontario Professor of Physics Peter Brown analyzed the data: "The asteroid was about 17 meters in diameter and weighed approximately 10,000 metric tons," he reports. "It struck Earth's atmosphere at 40,000 mph and broke apart about 12 to 15 miles above Earth's surface. The energy of the resulting explosion exceeded 470 kilotons of TNT." For comparison, the first atomic bombs produced only 15 to 20 kilotons...
Something to compare with..
