Looks to be at least 50km off the coast over the North Sea.
Chris
***
Chris L Peterson
Cloudbait Observatory
https://www.cloudbait.com
On 2/20/2024 3:53 PM, drtanuki via Meteorite-list wrote:
List,
uk meteor w/ at least one fragmentation--
it may have dropped material on land. Good
luck to my friends heading there for a search.
Graham
On Tue, Feb 14, 2023 at 3:55 PM Chris Peterson via Meteorite-list <
meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com> wrote:
It was heading generally eastward over the Channel and was still burning
when it c
It was heading generally eastward over the Channel and was still burning
when it crossed the French shoreline. It is likely to have dropped
meteorites on land.
Chris
***
Chris L Peterson
Cloudbait Observatory
https://www.cloudbait.com
On 2/14/2023 3:29 AM, Graham
To be fair, we are sitting right now on a planet worth a lot more than
that! And we don't have to go anywhere to investigate it.
Resource quantity isn't really the problem. It's accessing those resources.
Chris
***
Chris L Peterson
Cloudbait Observatory
Chemical or liquid stain of some sort. Not part of the photographic image.
Chris
***
Chris L Peterson
Cloudbait Observatory
https://www.cloudbait.com
On 3/25/2022 2:09 AM, drtanuki via Meteorite-list wrote:
ering dark flight)
seems like it could still be at least tens (more?) of miles away when it hits
the ground.
Mendy Ouzillou
-Original Message-
From: Meteorite-list On Behalf Of
Chris Peterson via Meteorite-list
Sent: Thursday, January 20, 2022 8:24 AM
To: meteorite-list@meteoritec
If you saw it break up near the horizon, any meteorites produced are 100
miles or more away from you. For meteorites to be within a few miles of
your location you would have seen it break up directly overhead.
Chris
***
Chris L Peterson
Cloudbait Observatory
I'd be very surprised if ownership wasn't retained by the operator. If
viewed as an accident scene, the rules would probably follow those of
aircraft. At the other extreme, this doesn't seem different from a car
that loses control and leaves a public street, crashing onto private
property. The
A meteoroid in space is nominally at or just above freezing (i.e. 0° C),
but there is a fair range around that, especially toward the higher end,
depending on its emissivity. It almost certainly will not be very cold.
Space is not "cold". It is, of course, dominated by radiative heating
and
One over Colorado on Thanksgiving morning, as well. May have been 100
times brighter than the full Moon. I've only recorded three fireballs
this bright in 20 years. Exploded high, and over rough terrain, so not
much hope of finding any surviving material. But an impressive event.
-space-place-tech/>
On Wed, Jan 17, 2018 at 11:03 AM, Chris Peterson via Meteorite-list <
meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com> wrote:
It's not uncommon for large fireballs to produce seismic signatures.
They're created by atmospheric shock waves hitting the ground. The bodies
themselves
It's not uncommon for large fireballs to produce seismic signatures.
They're created by atmospheric shock waves hitting the ground. The
bodies themselves are nowhere near large enough to reach the ground
intact, so all that kinetic energy never results in cratering. ("Never"
as in "only every
Almost certainly not a Taurid.
Chris
***
Chris L Peterson
Cloudbait Observatory
http://www.cloudbait.com
On 11/17/2017 1:40 PM, Finbarr Connolly via Meteorite-list wrote:
Hello,
These Taurid fireballs are really putting on a show, here's yet another one
-
No, this isn't spam in the usual sense. It's clearly directed towards
meteor and meteorite people- long rants about how unfair the meteorite
classification system is. It's somebody who is very disgrunted, or
mentally ill. Or both.
Chris
***
Chris L Peterson
A weird little dialog between that sender and another at yeah.net has
been getting sent to the IMO info email address for the last week or so.
Complete lunacy, apparently.
Chris
***
Chris L Peterson
Cloudbait Observatory
http://www.cloudbait.com
On 8/12/2017 2:18
If you see a meteor that appears to strike the ground, it's probably
over 100 miles away. Maybe much more. That's because they stop burning
when they're a few tens of miles high.
Chris
***
Chris L Peterson
Cloudbait Observatory
http://www.cloudbait.com
On
The fusion crust will likely be warmer than the interior when the
meteorite hits. Not because of residual heat from melting, but because
for the last few tens of seconds of the fall the meteorite was being
blasted with near-ambient temperature air. It was starting to warm up to
ambient- it
Also important is to consider that the body in space may well have been
a good fraction of a meter (or more) across. But a meteorite producing
body didn't just ablate, it most likely fragments. And the small
fragments very, very rapidly drop below the speed necessary to sustain
ablation. So
There's really no way for such a stone to be heated significantly by the
energy dissipated when crashing through a roof.
In all likelihood, the reason that observed falls are reported as hot is
because people expect hot, and confuse hot with cold. I don't think the
incidence of reports of
Hi Doug-
I don't think atmospheric extinction normally plays much of a role in
color perception of bright meteors. You don't get a full magnitude
difference between red and blue until you are about 15° above the
horizon, or about four air masses. And even at a magnitude difference,
I'd only
I seek color in submitted witness reports, not necessarily to provide
additional scientific information (although it's data, so I wouldn't
completely rule out that possibility), but rather, to understand how
people see things differently, and to make for a more complete public
report, since
Meteor color is important. It's just not a very useful measure for
determining composition. Color changes with meteor speed and meteor
depth in the atmosphere. And certainly, the composition is a factor,
both in terms of chemical composition and bulk properties. But the
relationship is
The whole issue of meteor color is complex. We now have many examples of
high resolution meteor spectra... but "color" is a physiological
phenomenon that isn't always easy to relate to physical spectra.
The light of meteors consists mostly of thermally broadened atomic
emission lines- lots of
Look closely at the full resolution video and you can see the meteor's
wings flapping!
Chris
***
Chris L Peterson
Cloudbait Observatory
http://www.cloudbait.com
On 4/16/2015 10:48 PM, Stephen Thompson via Meteorite-list wrote:
Nice catch !!..The motion, speed,
There is nothing definitive about it. The paper describes many factors
that could change the D/H ratio in different samples, and is much more
cautious in its conclusions than the typical press reports suggest:
From the ROSINA measurements on comet 67P/Churyumov-Gerasimenko, we
conclude that
It's certainly real. That's a typical meteor train dissipation pattern.
Chris
***
Chris L Peterson
Cloudbait Observatory
http://www.cloudbait.com
On 11/19/2014 7:17 PM, Robert Woolard via Meteorite-list wrote:
List,
One of our local radio stations posted this link
I caught this nearly overhead from central Colorado on my camera. I
believe it was probably the decaying COSMOS 2495 (Norad 39732). I should
have two angles on it tomorrow confirming that this was not a meteor.
Chris
***
Chris L Peterson
Cloudbait Observatory
Nope, I think not.
Chris
***
Chris L Peterson
Cloudbait Observatory
http://www.cloudbait.com
On 5/27/2014 4:52 PM, Art Jones via Meteorite-list wrote:
In the news from this am:
An Ohio man believes a meteorite hit his car early Sunday morning. Joe Massa of
It may depend on the choice of email client. I'm not seeing any
differences (using Thunderbird). I still see the sender in the From
field. If I click Reply it still goes to the sender. If I click Reply
all it still goes to the list and everyone else. If I click Reply
list (which I'm using
Ground level sonics are a very good indicator that meteorites were
produced. However, the absence of sonics doesn't argue against
meteorites at all.
In all likelihood, the majority of meteorite falls are not preceded with
either a significant fireball nor any acoustics. We are subject to a
The majority that produce _falls_, yes, but not _finds_, I think. That
is, your typical find (either a single individual or several pieces)
probably didn't come from a spectacular meteor event. Of course, finds
in large strewn fields are a different matter.
Atmospheric entry models
Also worth noting is that some orbital parameters (such as semi-major
axis) are exquisitely sensitive to the value of the initial velocity.
Unless you know that to within a few percent, there's hardly any point
in calculating the parameters at all (although inclination can be a
useful value).
There is almost no possibility of a meteor having that speed. The
maximum possible velocity a body in orbit around the Sun can encounter
the Earth at is 72 km/s. Anything faster than that would exceed the
solar escape velocity, implying either some sort of slingshot orbit or a
body originating
One other comment on the matter. Debunk is almost always pejorative,
implying that the thing being debunked was fraudulent, or complete
rubbish. We debunk astrology. We debunk pseudoscientific claims. But
there's nothing to suggest that the original claim was anything other
than honest and
Then you need to tune up your analysis skills. And your knowledge of
meteoritics. The video was not falsified, and is hardly phony. What it
shows is plausibly explained by the meteorite hypothesis. Many, perhaps
most meteorite falls are not preceded by a significant fireball, and
even fewer by
There was nothing ridiculous about it. There still isn't.
The Fox News deer video has been debunked (and that's the correct word),
however, since the deer were externally illuminated (contrary to the
report), and the so-called UFOs can be seen to be nothing more than
internal reflections in
How am I gullible? From the very beginning I said this was probably not
a meteorite. That's still what I say, but now I'm even more confident,
given that people familiar with skydiving have provided a reasonable
scenario for how a rock could be packed with a parachute. I still accept
the
I'd like to point out that the meteorite explanation has not been
debunked, nor has it been proven that it was a rock from the parachute.
The falling object is still consistent with a meteorite. What's been
demonstrated is that the rock is very plausibly explained as something
trapped in the
NASA has not debunked it. And the parachutists have only determined a
plausible way that a small rock could have ended up in the parachute.
As I said, the meteorite hypothesis has not been disproved, only
relegated to a sufficiently small likelihood that further investigation
is probably
Observatory
http://www.cloudbait.com
On 4/9/2014 4:30 PM, Jim Wooddell wrote:
Based on what?
Jim
On 4/9/2014 3:20 PM, Chris Peterson wrote:
snip
The falling object is still consistent with a meteorite. snip
Chris
__
Visit the Archives at http
The hypothesis has not been debunked by NASA.
I hardly think the parachutists are making things up. I just think
they're a bit confused about how science works.
Chris
***
Chris L Peterson
Cloudbait Observatory
http://www.cloudbait.com
On 4/9/2014 4:59 PM, Michael
Seems pretty normal. While there's still at least a reasonable
possibility of a meteorite, I'd expect a lot of chatter among people
interested in meteorites. Once it's demonstrated that the meteorite
explanation is extremely unlikely, people move on. What's left to discuss?
Chris
It is not mathematically impossible, just very unlikely.
While I agree that there are more likely explanations than a meteorite,
nothing is obviously faked (on casual inspection), and it's dangerous to
label something as fake (which implies deception), or even just
wrong, on nothing more than
I'd put the terminal velocity for a stone of that apparent size between
50 and 100 m/s. Say, between 100 and 200 mph (and I'd lean towards the
lower end given the tumbling). That seems about right given the few
frames it appears in (of course, estimating both size and distance is
difficult).
Daytime fireballs are easily missed, and small meteorites can be
produced with neither a significant fireball nor any audible atmospheric
acoustics. A fireball would have been several minutes earlier, and most
acoustics as well.
Chris
***
Chris L Peterson
, Chris Peterson wrote:
I'd put the terminal velocity for a stone of that apparent size between 50
and 100 m/s. Say, between 100 and 200 mph (and I'd lean towards the lower
end given the tumbling).
The sky divers are falling, so the relative speed between them and the
rock would be even less than
It certainly could be a hoax. If so, however, it's instructional,
because it seems technically accurate. Most people trying to fake
something like this would probably have flames and smoke coming off the
object. That's what we typically see with fakes.
Chris
***
Of course, as I said earlier, there are much more likely scenarios than
a meteorite. I was just taking exception with any blind assertion that
this was fake, absent clear evidence of such.
Chris
***
Chris L Peterson
Cloudbait Observatory
http://www.cloudbait.com
The jumper already has his shoot open. An expert diver with a high
performance shoot could still be going very fast, of course, but in all
likelihood there would be a pretty good delta-v in this case (it looks
like his jumping partner sails past pretty quickly still in free fall).
Chris
Wikipedia is generally one of the best sources for scientific information,
especially as a first stop. And the article about meteors is no exception.
While the color of meteors (especially in the case of green) is generally
dominated by atmospheric emission, the meteoroid composition certainly
Your understanding is broadly correct, although I don't think friction
is quite the right word to describe the heating process for particles
smaller than about a centimeter. The mechanism of heating depends on the
particle size and on the mean free path of atmospheric molecules (and
therefore
I have this on exactly one camera, which makes sorting it out difficult.
Definitely a big bright one, possibly over the border into northern NM.
Local weather and just plain bad luck seems to have kept if off all the
other cameras that should have caught it.
Whenever I see these birthday wishes for meteorites, I can't help but to
think that they represent what was a very bad day for an asteroid or
meteoroid, minding its own business for millions or even billions of
years and then, suddenly, nearly destroyed, reduced to a few burned
fragments.
There are many font editors floating around out there, some free, most
with free trial periods. To do a proper job you need both a good editor
and a fair knowledge of font design principles. But if you only need to
make some simple mods to an existing font, try the Private Font Editor
that is
You realize that if you manage to reproduce a somewhat realistic
volume of the Chelyabinsk shock wave (which is only sound heard) you
will blow out all the windows and ceiling tiles in the room.
That would certainly be impressive to a bunch of middle schoolers! But
you might not get invited
Jeff-
For comparison, S-A was a 100 ton body traveling at 14 km/s, and its
energy output was about 10 kT. Chelyabinsk was a 10,000 ton body
traveling at 30 km/s, and its energy output was about 500 kT. So these
two events were in completely different classes. Had S-A been stony, no
material
This meteor was caught on two of our network cameras. Preliminary
information is at http://www.cloudbait.com/science/fireball20131023.html
Chris
***
Chris L Peterson
Cloudbait Observatory
http://www.cloudbait.com
On 10/23/2013 10:26 PM, drtanuki wrote:
List,
Hi Jim-
As a rule, you can't tell much about a meteor's composition from the
visual colors observed. The eye is a lousy spectrometer!
The optical output of a meteor consists of hundreds of component
emission lines, possibly a blackbody component in some cases, and some
strong atmospheric
There may be some atmospheric effects, but I don't think they are the
usual explanation for the different colors people report.
Color vision is highly variable from person to person. The same color
may be reported as pink, blue, or green by different people. This is
especially true when
Duration is not a reliable way to distinguish between meteors and space
junk. You can only do that using velocity, which is difficult to do from
one vantage point. I've recorded re-entering debris that only glowed for
a few seconds.
Chris
***
Chris L Peterson
Analyse is a perfectly acceptable spelling, and is the standard way of
spelling the word in British English.
Chris
***
Chris L Peterson
Cloudbait Observatory
http://www.cloudbait.com
On 5/2/2013 10:46 AM, Adam Hupe wrote:
Then there is also the puzzle of why
I'd agree that a meteor can't collide with Saturn's rings, but it would be
correct usage to say a meteor collided with an airplane, a bird, or maybe even
the ground were it still hypersonic and ablating, since at that stage both the
visual effect and the body itself are typically called a
Weight is a force, properly measured in Newtons (or some other unit of
force). And strictly, your comment should have referred to the
acceleration of gravity, not the force of gravity. Of course, mass and
weight are related by Newton's Second Law, F=ma. And it is quite true
that the
Diamond combusts at a fairly low temperature, less than 1000 K,
converting it to amorphous carbon forms. At typical meteoritic ablation
temperatures, the graphites convert to gaseous products like CO and CO2.
So I'd say that the nanodiamonds found in ureilites have no significant
effect on the
Planetary Research Institute?
Chris
***
Chris L Peterson
Cloudbait Observatory
http://www.cloudbait.com
On 3/26/2013 2:21 PM, Marc Fries wrote:
Howdy ladies and gents
The scientists at Galactic Analytics have been working on a project behind the
scenes
It's extremely doubtful that this body could have done all that much
more damage. It simply wasn't big enough, or strong enough. A little
steeper (or just as likely, as little shallower), a little earlier or
later, probably wouldn't have made much difference.
While I'd love to see a
It would be more accurate to say that around 100 people were injured
more seriously than minor scrapes and cuts.
What I'm saying is that I don't consider it likely that any different
trajectory would have made this body significantly more dangerous; that
a million dead is really, really
The time delay between the airburst and the shock arriving at the
ground, directly beneath the burst, was about 90 seconds (not 11),
making the height about 28 km.
Chris
***
Chris L Peterson
Cloudbait Observatory
http://www.cloudbait.com
On 3/25/2013 10:31 PM, Don
While I have great respect for Boslough's modeling of large impactors,
I'm not convinced his models are really optimized for such small bodies
as this one. More to the point, his models typically start with
hypothetical values for the material properties of the bodies, and then
calculate their
It it's suspended before it strikes, is it a meteorite or a meteoroid?
Chris
***
Chris L Peterson
Cloudbait Observatory
http://www.cloudbait.com
On 3/12/2013 8:59 AM, Galactic Stone Ironworks wrote:
All ancient life-bearing meteorites, diatom-bearing meteorites,
There aren't many 1/2 mile wide asteroids that we don't know about.
Sure, there are little things like the Russian meteoroid or Carancas,
but in the scheme of natural disasters, they pose little threat. There
are hundreds of wildfires every year that cause more damage than
Chelyabinsk.
The
How objects move when they are in some sort of fluid medium (such as an
atmosphere) depends on the forces acting on them. A falling body in the
atmosphere has two forces acting upon it, one directed downwards (the
force created by gravity, and equal to the mass of the object times the
local
Well, broadly, DA14 was an Apollo, perturbed into an Aten by its recent
Earth encounter. Those categories are determined by orbit, not
composition. These orbital categorizations are not sufficient to tie any
asteroids to particular parents still in main belt orbits. Spectrally,
DA14 is an
A body larger than about a centimeter transfers its kinetic energy to
other forms primarily by compressing the air in front of it as it
descends into the atmosphere. The pressure involved is typically very
large- tens or hundreds of megapascals for meter-class bodies. Once this
ram pressure
Hi John-
I don't doubt that there are analogs between the fracturing you describe
at the bottom of a well and what happens with a meteor. However, there
may be some fundamental material differences. The rock at the bottom of
the well is typically very large compared with the area where
Hi Carl-
For the most part, breakup characteristics don't correlate well with
either size or material. I think it's largely a matter of the bulk
properties of the meteoroid- how monolithic versus faulted it is- and
any material can exist on a wide range between those extremes.
For the most
To elaborate on Rob's and Larry's comments, a further complication is
that asteroids are placed into classes based on two major criteria:
orbit and composition. The orbital classifications (like Apollo) are
mainly determined by ratios of specific orbital elements. The
compositional classes are
You are confusing optical aberrations for what is happening physically.
Not only are there no components of the fireball colliding with other
components, but no shock wave structures are apparent, either.
Analyzing very bright point sources in video is difficult, as there are
lens
There can be no dark object in front of a fireball. It is the leading
face of the body that is generating the pressure front and heating the
air, resulting in ablation and the light we see.
Keep in mind the scale, as well. We're seeing a ~15 meter diameter body
(and in every other reported
The point that Bjorn is missing, or ignoring, is it doesn't matter if
there is a debris field around DA14 (or any other NEO). All the debris
in such a field has virtually the same orbital parameters as the parent
body. Given good information about the atmospheric path of a meteor, the
original
Meteoroids don't implode, they explode. That occurs at whatever point
the stress they experience from the ram pressure on their forward face
exceeds their material strength. There is nothing special about a height
of 5 km; disruption can occur anywhere from 100 km high to the ground.
In the
I'm surprised you're interested in meteorites, since you clearly lack
even the most basic understanding of meteor radiants- and clearly are
unwilling to learn from people who actually know something.
Chris
***
Chris L Peterson
Cloudbait Observatory
I'm talking about two different trajectories. Different inclinations,
different semimajor axes, (very) different eccentricities, (very)
different geocentric velocities. There is no plausible mechanism for
ending up with two pieces of the same body in such radically different
orbits- it would
My goodness. What is it about a meteor that brings so many crazies out
of the woodwork?
Chris
***
Chris L Peterson
Cloudbait Observatory
http://www.cloudbait.com
On 2/16/2013 6:41 AM, noakes wrote:
What's wrong with this picture. Sonic booms (multiple) , close to
The orbital elements are precisely known for DA14, and the estimated
elements for the meteor are certainly not far off. You don't understand
orbital dynamics at all if you believe these two bodies could have been
in parallel orbits. They were not. There is no plausible mechanism that
could
Skepticism does not require having significant doubt about things which
are well understood. The suggestion that has been offered is either the
product of extreme ignorance or of outright pseudoscience (well, the
question was a fair one, but the insistence upon sticking with the
belief in
It takes a large amount of energy to split a massive body into
components with radically different orbits (and that these bodies have
radically different orbits is known beyond reasonable doubt). That
energy could be supplied explosively, as when a pair of bodies collide.
But that amount of
It is 100% certain that the two bodies are unrelated, given the physical
impossibility of a single object producing the two completely different
trajectories involved. I'd suggest you study orbital dynamics before
making scientifically unsound suggestions.
NASA has made no final verdict. It's
On Earth, a Martian meteorite refers to a piece of Martian crust or
mantle knocked off that planet's surface and delivered to Earth. None
are iron, or likely to be since that would require a body colliding with
Mars with enough energy to penetrate to the core- something that hasn't
happened
That would not be a good choice for meteor analysis, although it looks
good for other types of sky monitoring.
Chris
***
Chris L Peterson
Cloudbait Observatory
http://www.cloudbait.com
On 1/3/2013 6:50 PM, Stuart McDaniel wrote:
Here is the other I was trying to
There are a number of off-the-shelf allsky cameras suitable for your
other sky phenomena requirement. But if meteor observing is high on
your list, there are not. For meteors, you want a normal video frame
rate (typically 30 fps), BW, no integration features, no long exposure
features. You
Ah.
Well, all asteroids show impacts. The impact rate is low because of the
small cross section, but there is lots of time. Debris streams are
mostly short lived- a few thousand years- so I don't know how much they
contribute to asteroid impacts. And it's worth keeping in mind that
there are
At just a few kilometers across, Toutatis is extremely unlikely to
experience any Geminid impacts. Furthermore, is isn't optically
resolved, so the light of any impact would be lost in the much greater
light of the reflected Sun (Toutatis has the same albedo as the Moon,
and we can only see
I doubt you were seeing micrometeorites, and almost certainly not
Orionid micrometeorites. While there is iron in Halley's dust trail, it
remains a trace constituent. Orionid micrometeorites should be
silicates, not iron particles.
You don't state the size of particles observed, but typical
This fireball was caught on two of our cameras. Bad weather west of the
Front Range blocked other possible captures. I have some initial
information posted at
http://www.cloudbait.com/science/fireball20121013.html , but am still
analyzing this event.
Chris
--
***
The first and last examples are highly speculative, and probably not
examples of fires started by meteorites.
Tunguska, of course, shows how fires can be started by the air burst of
a _meteor_, which makes sense. But I don't know of any case where there
is good evidence of a fire started by
Sorry, but that's just crazy. A meteoritic body that strikes the ground
at terminal velocity, as virtually all meteorites do, cannot be hot
enough to start a fire. It doesn't matter what it's made of. And in
fact, there is virtually no evidence supporting the idea that cometary
bodies produce
I've never heard a credible account of a fire started by a meteorite
fall, and on theoretical grounds, there's no reason we would ever expect
a meteorite to be hot enough to start a fire. Of course, that doesn't
discount a secondary effect, such as a meteorite causing a fire by
puncturing a
There is NO suspicion at all that any Colorado fires were connected with
meteors. During one fire, controllers rather foolishly grounded the fire
fighting planes after witnesses reported a daytime fireball over the
eastern part of the state. That's the extent of it. Everything else is
media
They might reasonably call it an anti-meteoroid shelter, but the fact
is, meteorite is not well enough defined to say that once a meteoroid
impacts an object in space, it can't be called a meteorite. I don't have
a problem with the usage in the article. Meteoroid and meteorite are
reasonably
1 - 100 of 628 matches
Mail list logo
