That was close. Tunguska was pretty bad, too. Funny how now the two
events have both been in Russia.

Steve

On 2013-02-16, Steve B wrote:
That was close. Tunguska was pretty bad, too. Funny how now the two
events have both been in Russia.

I was thinking about this too, my explanation is that Russia has a
large area of territory, so it is more likely that a meteor would hit
Russia, than Luxembourg or Denmark.

i

Ignoramus21620 wrote:

On 2013-02-16, Steve B wrote:
That was close. Tunguska was pretty bad, too. Funny how now the two
events have both been in Russia.

I was thinking about this too, my explanation is that Russia has a
large area of territory, so it is more likely that a meteor would hit
Russia, than Luxembourg or Denmark.

Most likely explanation and two events some 105 years apart isn't a very
big statistical sample. Recall the various known meteor craters in other
parts of the world for other samples and the distribution sure looks
random.

On 2013-02-16, Pete C. wrote:

Ignoramus21620 wrote:

On 2013-02-16, Steve B wrote:
That was close. Tunguska was pretty bad, too. Funny how now the two
events have both been in Russia.

I was thinking about this too, my explanation is that Russia has a
large area of territory, so it is more likely that a meteor would hit
Russia, than Luxembourg or Denmark.

Most likely explanation and two events some 105 years apart isn't a very
big statistical sample. Recall the various known meteor craters in other
parts of the world for other samples and the distribution sure looks
random.

I agree. I am slightly fascinated with asteroids.

i

"Ignoramus21620" wrote in
message ...
On 2013-02-16, Steve B wrote:
That was close. Tunguska was pretty bad, too. Funny how now the
two
events have both been in Russia.

I was thinking about this too, my explanation is that Russia has a
large area of territory, so it is more likely that a meteor would
hit
Russia, than Luxembourg or Denmark.

i

Canada has some very large circular features too:
http://dsc.discovery.com/news/2006/1...ategory=travel
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Manicouagan_crater
The glaciers have wiped away the evidence of surface ejecta.

Long-period comets have orbits above or below the plane of the planets
(which was scrubbed clean?) and so are most likely to strike at the
latitude of their approach angle, which is centered in front of them.
There is relatively little land to leave a crater on south of the
equator.
http://www.astronomynotes.com/solfluf/s8.htm
"The long period comet orbits are oriented in all different random
angles while the short period comets orbits are within about 30
degrees of the solar system plane."

Long period meteors that don't release water vapor trails like comets
are hard to detect. We'd probably never notice one coming straight at
us since it doesn't appear to move over time.
jsw

On 2013-02-16, Jim Wilkins wrote:

"Ignoramus21620" wrote in
message ...
On 2013-02-16, Steve B wrote:
That was close. Tunguska was pretty bad, too. Funny how now the
two
events have both been in Russia.

I was thinking about this too, my explanation is that Russia has a
large area of territory, so it is more likely that a meteor would
hit
Russia, than Luxembourg or Denmark.

i

Canada has some very large circular features too:
http://dsc.discovery.com/news/2006/1...ategory=travel
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Manicouagan_crater
The glaciers have wiped away the evidence of surface ejecta.

Long-period comets have orbits above or below the plane of the planets
(which was scrubbed clean?) and so are most likely to strike at the
latitude of their approach angle, which is centered in front of them.
There is relatively little land to leave a crater on south of the
equator.
http://www.astronomynotes.com/solfluf/s8.htm
"The long period comet orbits are oriented in all different random
angles while the short period comets orbits are within about 30
degrees of the solar system plane."

Long period meteors that don't release water vapor trails like comets
are hard to detect. We'd probably never notice one coming straight at
us since it doesn't appear to move over time.
jsw



Scary and true!

Ignoramus329 wrote in
:

On 2013-02-16, Jim Wilkins wrote:
Long period meteors that don't release water vapor trails like comets
are hard to detect. We'd probably never notice one coming straight at
us since it doesn't appear to move over time.

Scary and true!

It might be scary if it were true, but it's complete nonsense.

There is no such thing as "one coming straight at us" if for no other reason than that we are
not sitting still. The direction from Earth to *anything* changes continually, because we're in
an orbit about 190 million miles wide around the Sun. Anything "coming straight at us" today
certainly won't be tomorrow, because the planet will have moved one and a half million
miles.

"Doug Miller" wrote in message
...
Ignoramus329 wrote in
:

On 2013-02-16, Jim Wilkins wrote:
Long period meteors that don't release water vapor trails like
comets
are hard to detect. We'd probably never notice one coming straight
at
us since it doesn't appear to move over time.

Scary and true!

It might be scary if it were true, but it's complete nonsense.

There is no such thing as "one coming straight at us" if for no
other reason than that we are
not sitting still. The direction from Earth to *anything* changes
continually, because we're in
an orbit about 190 million miles wide around the Sun. Anything
"coming straight at us" today
certainly won't be tomorrow, because the planet will have moved one
and a half million
miles.


If it approaches on a tangent from ahead or behind it won't have much
relative motion against the stars.

On Sat, 16 Feb 2013 10:56:28 -0500, "Jim Wilkins"
wrote:


"Ignoramus21620" wrote in
message ...
On 2013-02-16, Steve B wrote:
That was close. Tunguska was pretty bad, too. Funny how now the
two
events have both been in Russia.

I was thinking about this too, my explanation is that Russia has a
large area of territory, so it is more likely that a meteor would
hit
Russia, than Luxembourg or Denmark.

i

Canada has some very large circular features too:
http://dsc.discovery.com/news/2006/1...ategory=travel
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Manicouagan_crater
The glaciers have wiped away the evidence of surface ejecta.

I've been to Manicouagan 4 times on winter camping trips. We spent
most of the time in the mountains that were thrown up on the west
shore of the lake -- the white area in the bottom of the photo.

There's a series of five dams between the lake and the St Lawrence. In
atlases that predate the dam closest to the lake (Manic 5), the lake
is horseshoe shaped rather than a complete ring.

A large sectioned and polished fragment of nickel-iron collected at
Manicouagan is on display in the Harvard natural history museum.

--
Ned Simmons

Steve B wrote:

That was close. Tunguska was pretty bad, too. Funny how now the two
events have both been in Russia.


The third wasn't.

So little is known on the Tunguska event - but it might be that the
two are related. Might be a stream in orbit that will hit Russia every
100 years or so. Something to look out for.

Martin

On 2/15/2013 11:45 PM, Steve B wrote:
That was close. Tunguska was pretty bad, too. Funny how now the two
events have both been in Russia.

Steve