Re: [Vo]:Russian meteor coincidence odds

against Alaska and California this past summer. Does this new information suggest anything about the probabilities we have been considering? From: James Bowery To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Tuesday, March 5, 2013 5:13 PM Subject: Re: [Vo]:Russian meteor

Re: [Vo]:Russian meteor coincidence odds

Jim, Thanks for the AIRBURST reference. On Tue, Mar 5, 2013 at 1:05 PM, James Bowery wrote: > Sandia Labs has done extensive modeling of the dynamics of meteor > explosions and even has some pretty numeric visualizations for your viewing > joy: > > https://share.sandia.gov/news/resources/relea

Re: [Vo]:Russian meteor coincidence odds

Sandia Labs has done extensive modeling of the dynamics of meteor explosions and even has some pretty numeric visualizations for your viewing joy: https://share.sandia.gov/news/resources/releases/2007/asteroid.html On Tue, Mar 5, 2013 at 11:43 AM, ChemE Stewart wrote: > I understand kinetic ene

Re: [Vo]:Russian meteor coincidence odds

I understand kinetic energy, but a kinetic energy weapon is designed to slam into something, the meteor did not hit anything As far as I can tell the largest piece made a round hole in the lake. The damage was done from a shockwave from a blast. This was not a kinetic energy weapon, it exploded.

Re: [Vo]:Russian meteor coincidence odds

ChemE, I can't recommend arithmetic highly enough to you: 1ton*.5*(3mph)^2?ton_explosive ([1 * tonm] * 0.5) * ([3 * mph]^2) ? ton_explosive = 194988.5 ton_explosive http://www.testardi.com/rich/calchemy2/ On Tue, Mar 5, 2013 at 11:18 AM, ChemE Stewart wrote: > But something ex

Re: [Vo]:Russian meteor coincidence odds

But something exploded with the force of 30 Hiroshima bombs, I don't believe a sonic boom can do that On Tuesday, March 5, 2013, James Bowery wrote: > Yes you missed something. You missed this part of my post: > > the motive of concocting such a coincidence would be to telegraph a message > to

Re: [Vo]:Russian meteor coincidence odds

Yes you missed something. You missed this part of my post: the motive of concocting such a coincidence would be to telegraph a message to intelligence agencies that "You will notice we sent the asteroid's little brother in a controlled shallow-angle entry. Think what we could have done? Notice,

Re: [Vo]:Russian meteor coincidence odds

Are you saying the meteor itself was a kinetic energy weapon? Because it did not hit anything. It exploded. Am I missing something? A *kinetic energy penetrator* (also known as a *KE weapon*) is a type of ammunition which, like a bullet

Re: [Vo]:Russian meteor coincidence odds

On Tue, Mar 5, 2013 at 9:57 AM, Jed Rothwell wrote: > James Bowery wrote: > > At this point I'm not really interested in confirmation. I have all the >> confirmation I need to summarily reject the "sheer coincidence" explanation >> with just the two events. >> > > It seems to me you have to hav

Re: [Vo]:Russian meteor coincidence odds

James Bowery wrote: At this point I'm not really interested in confirmation. I have all the confirmation I need to summarily reject the "sheer coincidence" explanation with just the two events. It seems to me you have to have a plausible mechanism to confirm that something is not a coincide

Re: [Vo]:Russian meteor coincidence odds

I agree. Also hard for me to understand how Tunguska, a 1000 times larger atmospheric explosion than recent could be made from a rock they can't find. That is 30,000 Hiroshima bombs Danger Will Robinson, Danger On Tuesday, March 5, 2013, James Bowery wrote: > At this point I'm not really inter

Re: [Vo]:Russian meteor coincidence odds

At this point I'm not really interested in confirmation. I have all the confirmation I need to summarily reject the "sheer coincidence" explanation with just the two events. I'm interested in anything that would tend to disconfirm -- say evidence that atmospheric entry events of this magnitude ar

Re: [Vo]:Russian meteor coincidence odds

Looks like the meteoroid had been "around" a while: http://cosmiclog.nbcnews.com/_news/2013/03/02/17160360-meteor-lurked-for-thousands-of-years-before-blasting-russia-experts-say?lite

Re: [Vo]:Russian meteor coincidence odds

Alex, I haven't been able to google any numerical data yet but I think it is fairly well established that comet tails create meteor showers. The Leonid meteor shower is thought to originate from the comet Tempel-Tuttle. The Leonid meteors

Re: [Vo]:Russian meteor coincidence odds

That should be testable. Do we have data showing an increase in activity of smaller meteors during flybys? On Thu, Feb 28, 2013 at 6:45 PM, Harry Veeder wrote: > As a practical matter, whenever a large body passes near the earth > should should we regard it as warning sign that the earth > will

Re: [Vo]:Russian meteor coincidence odds

Jim, Have you tried to plug this additional Russian sized asteroid into your probability model that they just found a couple of days ago passing between us and the moon? http://science.nbcnews.com/_news/2013/03/03/17171923-another-asteroid-similar-to-russian-meteor-zooming-past-us-harmlessly?lite

Re: [Vo]:Russian meteor coincidence odds

A video of a man hit by lightning twice...wow! http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9Qr39-pbSqA but analysis reveals the video is fake. :-( Harry

Re: [Vo]:Russian meteor coincidence odds

I'm overwhelmed by just the 16 hour span of 2 rare-event coincidence and am loathe to incorporate more as both a lot of work to validate and as well as unnecessary to already put me in a state of mind that I'd rather not deal with given the need to pay rent. On Fri, Mar 1, 2013 at 12:36 PM, Jouni

Re: [Vo]:Russian meteor coincidence odds

James, I think that you should also consider that 2014 Mars comet flyby that is once in hundred million years event especially if it is going to hit the planet. Odd coincidence or is it just about pushing the Earth's space program ahead! If you have not yet read this Landis paper, I would recomme

Re: [Vo]:Russian meteor coincidence odds

That's a bad interpretation. I could have used the word "generation" to avoid such an interpretation of "lifetime" but I wanted to have a longer span to have conservatively large odds of witnessing the event. We'll have to either update our understanding of the statistics of these events quite su

Re: [Vo]:Russian meteor coincidence odds

ould have been far worse. The distance traveled by this one through the > atmosphere was several times longer than it could have been. > > Dave > > > -Original Message- > From: Eric Walker > To: vortex-l > Sent: Fri, Mar 1, 2013 12:27 am > Subject: Re: [Vo]

Re: [Vo]:Russian meteor coincidence odds

-Original Message- From: Eric Walker To: vortex-l Sent: Fri, Mar 1, 2013 12:27 am Subject: Re: [Vo]:Russian meteor coincidence odds On Thu, Feb 28, 2013 at 8:09 AM, Alexander Hollins wrote: then it can be estimated to have happened 454 THOUSAND times in Earth's history. This rais

Re: [Vo]:Russian meteor coincidence odds

On Thu, Feb 28, 2013 at 8:09 AM, Alexander Hollins < alexander.holl...@gmail.com> wrote: > then it can be estimated to have happened 454 THOUSAND times in Earth's > history. This raises an interesting philosophical problem. The simultaneous events were perhaps coincidence in a human timeframe

RE: [Vo]:Russian meteor coincidence odds

espan, the odds, at about 1 in 100 thousand, seem much higher. Are they high enough that we can relatively confidently chalk it up to coincidence? Date: Thu, 28 Feb 2013 14:47:28 -0600 Subject: Re: [Vo]:Russian meteor coincidence odds From: jabow...@gmail.com To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Paulson

Re: [Vo]:Russian meteor coincidence odds

That is exactly the issue I raised. If the swarm of rocks in orbit around the asteroid are too small to seen, their existence will be overlooked until it is too late. We might want to look more carefully at the images. Ed On Feb 28, 2013, at 6:45 PM, Harry Veeder wrote: As a practical ma

Re: [Vo]:Russian meteor coincidence odds

Here's a sanity check: Let's say that the Chelyabinsk meteor and the 2012 DA14 asteroid were about the same size. Using atmospheric entry frequency of about every century as a wide-agreed observable we should expect to see something the size of the 2012 DA14 asteroid coming within the diameter of

Re: [Vo]:Russian meteor coincidence odds

James, That paper was well written with lots of history , thanks for posting . Looks like much of that research was done during Apollo. I have a attached a new paper just released on Arxiv. It discusses the paradigm of trying to explain how some of the "craters" have raised center cones with bou

Re: [Vo]:Russian meteor coincidence odds

Daniel Rocha wrote: > While the one that hit Russia hit Earth within its usual radius, the more > distant asteroid "hit Earth" with a radius as big as Jupiter. That > increases A LOT the probability of these kind of coincidences . . . > Good point! - Jed

Re: [Vo]:Russian meteor coincidence odds

As a practical matter, whenever a large body passes near the earth should should we regard it as warning sign that the earth will temporarily be at an elevated risk of being hit by a smaller body? People who study near-earth objects should be able to answer this question which is different from the

Re: [Vo]:Russian meteor coincidence odds

To rephrase your objection to my more rigorous Poisson process treatment: "The assumption 'The Chelyabinsk meteor and the 2012 DA events are statistically similar events.' is questionable." Your argument would clearly be reasonable if the size of theChelyabinsk meteor and the size of the 2012 DA

Re: [Vo]:Russian meteor coincidence odds

I don't think the coincidence that remote. You have to calculate the probabilities as the asteroids were crossing spheres the size of of their distance to earth. While the one that hit Russia hit Earth within its usual radius, the more distant asteroid "hit Earth" with a radius as big as Jupiter. T

Re: [Vo]:Russian meteor coincidence odds

James Bowery wrote: > > "They blast out circular craters almost regardless of their impact angle; > and they are themselves almost completely dispersed or vaporized in the > target rock and crater ejecta. > > Interesting. That would explain Tunguska, but not the recent round hole in the lake. I d

Re: [Vo]:Russian meteor coincidence odds

Guys, I posted this before but here it is again and it talks about the "circular craters" and absence of fragments in great depth: http://pubs.usgs.gov/of/2005/1190/of2005-1190.pdf "They blast out circular craters almost regardless of their impact angle; and they are themselves almost completely

Re: [Vo]:Russian meteor coincidence odds

Me too On Thursday, February 28, 2013, Harry Veeder wrote: > Unless the russian meteor was tracked for a period of time before it > entered earth's atmosphere, extropolating the orbit of the Russian > meteor into the past seems like guess work to me. > > > harry > > On Thu, Feb 28, 2013 at 1:07 P

Re: [Vo]:Russian meteor coincidence odds

Unless the russian meteor was tracked for a period of time before it entered earth's atmosphere, extropolating the orbit of the Russian meteor into the past seems like guess work to me. harry On Thu, Feb 28, 2013 at 1:07 PM, Alexander Hollins wrote: > if it were in orbit around it, there would

Re: [Vo]:Russian meteor coincidence odds

ct to get through the top of the atmosphere without > exploding? > > Dave > > > -Original Message- > From: Jed Rothwell > To: vortex-l > Sent: Thu, Feb 28, 2013 4:46 pm > Subject: Re: [Vo]:Russian meteor coincidence odds > > ChemE Stewart wrote: &g

Re: [Vo]:Russian meteor coincidence odds

: vortex-l Sent: Thu, Feb 28, 2013 4:46 pm Subject: Re: [Vo]:Russian meteor coincidence odds ChemE Stewart wrote: And that's on top of the fact divers found nothing underwater. I do not think they have found a trace of the Tunguska meteor. They have been exploring the epicenter for de

Re: [Vo]:Russian meteor coincidence odds

ChemE Stewart wrote: And that's on top of the fact divers found nothing underwater. I do not think they have found a trace of the Tunguska meteor. They have been exploring the epicenter for decades. Strange! Why is there a hole if nothing whacked into the ground? Some people think it was *anti

Re: [Vo]:Russian meteor coincidence odds

Original Message- > From: ChemE Stewart 'cheme...@gmail.com');>> > To: vortex-l 'vortex-l@eskimo.com');>> > Sent: Thu, Feb 28, 2013 1:15 pm > Subject: Re: [Vo]:Russian meteor coincidence odds > > The primary assumption in the Arxiv paper

Re: [Vo]:Russian meteor coincidence odds

: ChemE Stewart To: vortex-l Sent: Thu, Feb 28, 2013 1:15 pm Subject: Re: [Vo]:Russian meteor coincidence odds The primary assumption in the Arxiv paper I referenced is that the meteor tracked in a line to the 25' dia hole in the ice "Assuming that the hole in the ice sheet of Lake

Re: [Vo]:Russian meteor coincidence odds

. > > > This still suggests much higher odds than the original naive calculation > odds, doesn't it? > > > > -- > Date: Thu, 28 Feb 2013 12:41:11 -0600 > > Subject: Re: [Vo]:Russian meteor coincidence odds > From: jabow...@

Re: [Vo]:Russian meteor coincidence odds

o the odds of the flyby >> occurring on that day, rather than any day. >> >> -- >> Date: Thu, 28 Feb 2013 09:30:52 -0600 >> >> Subject: Re: [Vo]:Russian meteor coincidence odds >> From: jabow...@gmail.com >> To: vorte

Re: [Vo]:Russian meteor coincidence odds

on > odds, doesn't it? > > > > -- > Date: Thu, 28 Feb 2013 12:41:11 -0600 > > Subject: Re: [Vo]:Russian meteor coincidence odds > From: jabow...@gmail.com > To: vortex-l@eskimo.com > > You obviously misunderstand the Poisson process and/or my calculation. > > There is

RE: [Vo]:Russian meteor coincidence odds

. This still suggests much higher odds than the original naive calculation odds, doesn't it? Date: Thu, 28 Feb 2013 12:41:11 -0600 Subject: Re: [Vo]:Russian meteor coincidence odds From: jabow...@gmail.com To: vortex-l@eskimo.com You obviously misunderstand the Poisson process and/

Re: [Vo]:Russian meteor coincidence odds

Edmund Storms wrote: As for what the media says, are we to believe that at least three very rare > events happened at nearly the same time? > First, I meant legit astronomy journals, not Fox News. Second, if experts conclude that three rare events occurred by coincidence I am not inclined to arg

Re: [Vo]:Russian meteor coincidence odds

2013, or some other reason or piece of > information that suggests we should pay attention to the odds of the flyby > occurring on that day, rather than any day. > > ------ > Date: Thu, 28 Feb 2013 09:30:52 -0600 > > Subject: Re: [Vo]:Russian meteor coinc

RE: [Vo]:Russian meteor coincidence odds

cular date, Feb. 15th, 2013, or some other reason or piece of information that suggests we should pay attention to the odds of the flyby occurring on that day, rather than any day. Date: Thu, 28 Feb 2013 09:30:52 -0600 Subject: Re: [Vo]:Russian meteor coincidence odds From: jabow...@gmail.c

Re: [Vo]:Russian meteor coincidence odds

On Feb 28, 2013, at 11:07 AM, Alexander Hollins wrote: if it were in orbit around it, there would have been an additional vector to its motion. Tracking information verified a straight line trajectory from what I've read. Good thought though. If the orbit was as large as would be require

Re: [Vo]:Russian meteor coincidence odds

/365 comes out to >> 11,915 years. >> >> So like I said we can expect an event like this roughly every 10,000 >> years or so. >> >> That's a far cry from the one in one billion odds or the one in one >> million odds after discounting by a facto

Re: [Vo]:Russian meteor coincidence odds

The primary assumption in the Arxiv paper I referenced is that the meteor tracked in a line to the 25' dia hole in the ice "Assuming that the hole in the ice sheet of Lake Cherbakul was produced by a fragment of the meteoroid is also a very important hypothesis of this work. More importantly, our

Re: [Vo]:Russian meteor coincidence odds

if it were in orbit around it, there would have been an additional vector to its motion. Tracking information verified a straight line trajectory from what I've read. Good thought though. On Thu, Feb 28, 2013 at 9:19 AM, Edmund Storms wrote: > I suggested an explanation that apparently was lost

Re: [Vo]:Russian meteor coincidence odds

Edmund Storms wrote: I suggested an explanation that apparently was lost in the discussion. > Suppose each asteroid has a swarm of smaller rocks in orbit around it. > Suppose one of these rocks was in an orbit that caused it to approach the > earth from the opposite direction at the time of the

Re: [Vo]:Russian meteor coincidence odds

It looks like they believe the meteor came from the asteroid belt out past Mars. There is a new paper posted on Arxiv http://news.discovery.com/space/asteroids-meteors-meteorites/russian-meteor-analysis-orbit-apollo-asteroid-130226.htm James, you said that it could not have been pulled in from a

Re: [Vo]:Russian meteor coincidence odds

The calculations here relfect of view that they are relatable only in ways which respect to the "laws of physics". Harry On Thu, Feb 28, 2013 at 11:32 AM, Harry Veeder wrote: > The calculation of odds doesn't reveal relatedness. It is a deduction > based on theory of how they might related. > >

Re: [Vo]:Russian meteor coincidence odds

The calculation of odds doesn't reveal relatedness. It is a deduction based on theory of how they might related. Harry On Thu, Feb 28, 2013 at 11:06 AM, Jed Rothwell wrote: > I would point out: > > 1. The event did occur. > > 2. A causal connection between the two objects seems exceedingly un

Re: [Vo]:Russian meteor coincidence odds

On Thu, Feb 28, 2013 at 10:06 AM, Jed Rothwell wrote: > 2. A causal connection between the two objects seems exceedingly unlikely, > since they came from different directions at different times. No one has > suggested how there could be a connection, as far as I know. > > "could be" -- which impli

Re: [Vo]:Russian meteor coincidence odds

I suggested an explanation that apparently was lost in the discussion. Suppose each asteroid has a swarm of smaller rocks in orbit around it. Suppose one of these rocks was in an orbit that caused it to approach the earth from the opposite direction at the time of the meteor strike in Russ

Re: [Vo]:Russian meteor coincidence odds

cry from the one in one billion odds or the one in one >>> million odds after discounting by a factor of a thousand, isn't it? >>> >>> >>> -- >>> Date: Thu, 28 Feb 2013 01:04:34 -0600 >>> Subject: Re: [Vo]:Russian meteor

Re: [Vo]:Russian meteor coincidence odds

I would point out: 1. The event did occur. 2. A causal connection between the two objects seems exceedingly unlikely, since they came from different directions at different times. No one has suggested how there could be a connection, as far as I know. 3. Therefore it is coincidence, no matter ho

Re: [Vo]:Russian meteor coincidence odds

tor of a thousand, isn't it? >> >> >> -- >> Date: Thu, 28 Feb 2013 01:04:34 -0600 >> Subject: Re: [Vo]:Russian meteor coincidence odds >> From: jabow...@gmail.com >> To: vortex-l@eskimo.com >> >> >> You quote me inc

Re: [Vo]:Russian meteor coincidence odds

billion odds or the one in one > million odds after discounting by a factor of a thousand, isn't it? > > > -- > Date: Thu, 28 Feb 2013 01:04:34 -0600 > Subject: Re: [Vo]:Russian meteor coincidence odds > From: jabow...@gmail.com > To: vortex-

Re: [Vo]:Russian meteor coincidence odds

from the one in one billion odds or the one in one > million odds after discounting by a factor of a thousand, isn't it? > > > -------------- > Date: Thu, 28 Feb 2013 01:04:34 -0600 > Subject: Re: [Vo]:Russian meteor coincidence odds > From: jabow...@gmail.c

RE: [Vo]:Russian meteor coincidence odds

usand, isn't it? Date: Thu, 28 Feb 2013 01:04:34 -0600 Subject: Re: [Vo]:Russian meteor coincidence odds From: jabow...@gmail.com To: vortex-l@eskimo.com You quote me incorrectly. My actual words were "less than one in a million". I stated so because mine was a "naive calculat

Re: [Vo]:Russian meteor coincidence odds

You quote me incorrectly. My actual words were "less than one in a million". I stated so because mine was a "naive calculation" that came up with 1/133225 to which I then applied a "discount by a factor of a thousand" precisely to address such arguments as yours. To normalize your calculatio