Sparky wrote: From the smoke stack's output, I would not say that the wind was strong; maybe light. :?
Speculation that wind is in of itself, an electrical effect, would support moving charges theory. How that would affect a ionosphere to ground potential difference, I don't know.
My mention of wind was only related to the dryness of the air. Air is an insulator and dry air is a real good insulator... So how is an electrical discharge going to path through miles of dry air?
As suggested earlier,,, i'd expect the highest charge differential to be across the ionosphere and when an object leaves a large trail, of ablated material deep into the lower atmosphere, a short circuit is established with the internal atmosphere. the object gets caught in the crossfire. That is the impression i got when reading about the Columbia disaster, i may have misunderstood. d...z
"Columbia was struck a fatal blow by a super-bolt of lightning from space, now referred to as MEGALIGHTNING."
...
Sparky
Re: Feb 15 Meteorite(s) hit Russia - Analysis
Nothing about that that I can disagree with. I was attempting to complete the circuit with the charged fog, moving up to meet the brightening coma. If there was an arc discharge, it was hidden by the glowing coma/fog.
viscount aero
Re: Feb 15 Meteorite(s) hit Russia - Analysis
The only shadows cast are from ground-based objects that the meteor's light source illuminated. Something as bright as or brighter than the Sun, which this was, will not cast its own shadow but will be the primary source of light which will cast shadows of any other objects around it that are not themselves illuminated: http://www.youtube.com/watch?NR=1&featu ... 4N_FpEcxk4
dahlenaz
Re: Feb 15 Meteorite(s) hit Russia - Analysis
I am not sure what this Meteosat image reveals but it does have some details which deserve consideration and explanation... In some ways there are similarities to the patterns of coronal-scavanging of charge that i saw in some of my experiments. In those instances the discharge feeds off the surrounding area, or so it seems.
As for the meteor trails' blackened bulge, it's extension seems very well defined or confined. d...z
I was attempting to complete the circuit with the charged fog, moving up to meet the brightening coma. If there was an arc discharge, it was hidden by the glowing coma/fog.
I'm not sure if that fog was visible by eye, as many image sensors will work into the UV. Any multispectral data, UV and x-ray, might not be forthcoming for National Security reasons (an excuse there is no argument against), so it's difficult to pin down exactly what occured. Even if it was air friction initially causing heating, charging would also occur, and I think a good example is the video of rocks being dropped down a well bore hole. The rock will charge up as it falls, and discharge to the liner, if there is one, or to bare rock that may have many differing layers, likely with their own dielectric properties. The larger of the rocks creates pressure waves and dust as pieces are blown off, and has multiple discharge bangs, as did the meteor. So, even if friction was an initiator, the event would have soon become primarily electrical, IMO. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JT-INK5yHLA Also, if the trajectory could be determined, I wondered if the object might have travelled through the Van Allen belts, and if so what effects that might have had?
justcurious
Re: Feb 15 Meteorite(s) hit Russia - Analysis
The twin smoke tails show the signature corkscrew shape so there was a moving charge, a magnetic field, plasma, and probably the shockwave(s) was cause by the magnetic field releasing after the meteor discharged. That's my take so far.
How it discharged and how the light was created I am not sure, coulombe explosion maybe, semiconductors in the meteor, diode theory, etc. Why would the meteor get all hot and crazy after entering the atmosphere, just a matter of air friction? Or is it that the atmosphe is denser and hence more gas to ionize?
dahlenaz
Re: Feb 15 Meteorite(s) hit Russia - Analysis
Here is a video which touches on several details which may lend something to what we have been covering here.
In the first section he points out debris on the windshield, which was not included in a video segment that i saw earlier when questioning the missle scenario. This clears up the presence of the object seen to catch up with the meteor. The video also touches on electrolysis and hydrogen oxygen explosions, which helps to advance clarity of that discussion back a few pages.
dahlenaz wrote: Here is a video which touches on several details which may lend something to what we have been covering here.
In the first section he points out debris on the windshield, which was not included in a video segment that i saw earlier when questioning the missle scenario. This clears up the presence of the object seen to catch up with the meteor. The video also touches on electrolysis and hydrogen oxygen explosions, which helps to advance clarity of that discussion back a few pages.
That's the best analysis yet of the Russian meteor. He sums up what it is and what happened. The railgun experiment is the key to understanding. Thanks for posting that
dahlenaz
Re: Feb 15 Meteorite(s) hit Russia - Analysis
The video does give a good boost for atmospheric details. But the video doesn't quite explain timing and aerodynamics as could be done. The rail gun ignites the atmosphere in the barrel before the projectile pushes through and we see the ignited atmosphere pushed out ahead of the projectile.. Then the ignited atmosphere is pulled in behind the projectile and drawn out away further by the burble of the object. We can expect a burble behind the metor may times longer than the object is round and directly proportional to its speed. d...z
...
dahlenaz
Re: Feb 15 Meteorite(s) hit Russia - Analysis
I should clarify that i do not agree with all the observations made by the video author, as he assigns electrical dynamic (catch) phases to certain details. especially the dark ring which forms in the trail of the ignited atmosphere behind the projectile. The darkened area is almost certainly caused by a disproportional cooling of the flame at the vicinity of the metal frame which the projectile passes. The temperature of the gasses falls off rapidly in the burgle as well, in contrast to that which remains in the vacinity of the gun's barrel and surrounding metal. d...z
But do you not agree with his premise of charge separation occurring as well as the ignition of atmospheric hydrogen adn oxygen? These are the main ideas I think, that and the structure of the remaining contrail/plume.
Sparky
Re: Feb 15 Meteorite(s) hit Russia - Analysis
The twin smoke tails show the signature corkscrew shape so there was a moving charge--
The corkscrew trail is not necessarily an electrical signature.. It could have been produced by two objects tumbling. I can not figure out why they seem to come closer together and merge. But a meteor leaves an electron trail that can be seen by radar, according to National Geographic. So there is a plasma trail.
AS far as atmospheric H2O dissociation recombining, that has got to be part of what we are seeing.
justcurious
Re: Feb 15 Meteorite(s) hit Russia - Analysis
Sparky wrote:
The twin smoke tails show the signature corkscrew shape so there was a moving charge--
The corkscrew trail is not necessarily an electrical signature.. It could have been produced by two objects tumbling. I can not figure out why they seem to come closer together and merge. But a meteor leaves an electron trail that can be seen by radar, according to National Geographic. So there is a plasma trail.
AS far as atmospheric H2O dissociation recombining, that has got to be part of what we are seeing.
I guess that's possible (tumbling), but tumbling or turning in a direction of a corkscrew? And two "pieces" tumbling in the same directions forming a helical shape, that seems like a bit too coincidental for my taste.
Interesting theory by the recent video posted, that the electric charge elecrolyses the water in the air turning it into hydrogen and oxygen which burns brightly. Not sure why two smoke trails would emerge out of the main flare-up of the meteor. I'm guessing the pressure to blast out and away from the B-field confinement got it to split into filaments. I'm pretty certain that the shockwaves were mainly cause by the magnetic field building up then releasing (pinch/unpinch effect of ionised air/plasma, direct cause and effect). The shockwave is the one responsible for all the physical damage, I think it's important to understand it. The EM stuff seemed more or less localised, while the shockwave travelled great distances and was detected by seismographs thousands of miles away.
viscount aero
Re: Feb 15 Meteorite(s) hit Russia - Analysis
The structure created in the video experiments virtually mirrors that of the meteor's trail. It's uncanny and scalable as in plasma physics. It at least appears that way to me
justcurious
Re: Feb 15 Meteorite(s) hit Russia - Analysis
viscount aero wrote: The structure created in the video experiments virtually mirrors that of the meteor's trail. It's uncanny and scalable as in plasma physics. It at least appears that way to me
I just saw a big blob of fire, similiar to the blob of fire left-over right after the meteor flare-up. Seems plausible, water being turned into oxygen and hydrogen and burning up. All I saw from the rail gun though was a blob of fire. If that is indeed confirmed to be caused by electrolysis of water vapor in the cannon, then the theory/explanation of "water turned to fuel" would be plausible.
