WOW---some pretty good calculations and science there Doug----BRAVO!!
NASA screws up yet again!!
Kirk.....:-)
----- Original Message -----
From: "MexicoDoug" <mexicod...@aim.com>
To: <Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com>
Sent: Saturday, September 24, 2011 11:31 PM
Subject: [meteorite-list] 1 in 3200 odds of human impact (help)
Hi listers
I'm very suspicious of this widely quoted 1 in 3200 that is being passed
off as a scientific number by NASA.
Not 1:3000, nor between 1:1000 to 1:10,000: but 1:3200.
This foolishly precise assertation, which if you've read "The Little
Prince" you immediately suspect it is overstated due to the author's
calculations 70 years ago there...where a similar calculation is actually
done ...
Average cross sectional area of a person? (Depends if it is in the morning
when everyone is praying, I guess, or in the afternoon when everyone is
running out of work)...let's say:
Cross section per person:18 inches by 18 inches (1.5 x 1.5 sq. feet)
World population: 6.964 X 10^9 living souls
World Area: 196,939,900 sq miles
Calculations:
* Cross section per person = 2.5 sq. feet
* current world population occupies 624.3 square miles
(a wee bit bigger than Guam, and smaller than Singapore)
* people that could fit on Earth's surface: 2,196,000,000,000,000 (2.2
million X 10^9)
* Fraction of Earth's surface that's "people" = 6.96 / (2,196,000) =
0.00000317
= People occupy *ONLY* 3.2 parts per million (3.2 ppm) of the earth's
surface
So, saving rounding till the end, each piece of UARS actually has a
1/315,457 chance of falling on people (1/0.00000317).
In rounded numbers, that's about 1:320,000 per fragment ==> 26 fragments
approximately 1:12,000 chance.
I guess if you are American you need more space than if you are
Indonesian, and changing it to a 18 inches X 17 inches would change the
result by 6% ie, if 3200 were right for 18X18 it would now be about
1:3000, and that is one of so many assumptions making the 3200 number a
total joke of fake scientific confidence. If you gave everyone a square
yard ((91.4 cm)^2) instead, it would be in the 3000 range.
But here are the defficiencies I think of looking at it this way:
* this looks at the whole world vs. the limited satellite trace. A true
measurement would do a little calculus along the path considering the
population density and the probability of earlier or later entry which
could change probabilities by an order of magnitude easily.
* I think what I did would work for 26 darts, but not hunks of significant
size compared to a person's area unit.
* Finally there is the Sylacauga effect for bouncing material that will
affect things another factor of 2, 3, 4 who knows...
There must be a half dozen other complicating factors to do this right.
Does anyone know what has been considered to arrive at the bogusly precise
3200-1 odds being fed to us?
Love to hear any improvements on the above model (if you can call it a
model) which I got the 1:12,000 as a streaming (unverified) starting point
...
Kindest wishes
Doug
______________________________________________
Visit the Archives at
http://www.meteoritecentral.com/mailing-list-archives.html
Meteorite-list mailing list
Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com
http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
______________________________________________
Visit the Archives at http://www.meteoritecentral.com/mailing-list-archives.html
Meteorite-list mailing list
Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com
http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
