APOD: Peekskill Fireball Video: Johnstown (2011 Jan 23)

Comments and questions about the APOD on the main view screen.
User avatar
Chris Peterson
Abominable Snowman
Posts: 18596
Joined: Wed Jan 31, 2007 11:13 pm
Location: Guffey, Colorado, USA
Contact:

Re: APOD: Peekskill Fireball Video: Johnstown (2011 Jan 23)

Post by Chris Peterson » Tue Jan 25, 2011 4:03 am

zloq wrote:I think it's important to distinguish simplified models of typical scenarios from what can actually happen in the complex situation of a large object fragmenting at high velocity so that a chunk slams to the earth for immediate inspection - with or without a crater. I don't consider this straightforward and easily modeled with confidence, and I see words to that effect in the literature cited above. Therefore I consider "terminal velocity" an assumption that could easily be false - and I give the specific example of a high speed, low altitude fragmentation event.
There is no doubt that there are thousands, maybe millions, of terminal velocity meteorites for every one that involves a hypervelocity impact. There are hundreds of thousands of meteors that have been recorded, and none have been observed to break up below about 20 km, and most much higher.

The only certain example of a meteoroid reaching a very low altitude before breaking up is the Sikhote-Alin event in 1947. This was an iron body massing between 100 and 1000 tons, and some of the shrapnel produced when it broke up only 6 km high reached the ground at high enough velocities to create craters and embed itself in trees.

The only other historical high velocity impact I'm aware of was the Carancas (Peru) event in 2007. This was a stony meteoroid that survived all the way to the ground without breaking up at all- something previously considered impossible. People are still working to understand the nearly unique characteristics of that body.

In fact, there are some very good models now describing the behavior of meteors in the atmosphere. These models accurately describe the heating processes (including differential production of atomic species in the trail) and fragmentation processes. Asteroid 2008 TC3, which produced meteorites in Sudan, was modeled right to the ground, and the model accurately matched the actual strewn field, lending great support to the quality of this type of modeling.
Chris

*****************************************
Chris L Peterson
Cloudbait Observatory
https://www.cloudbait.com

zloq
A wild zloq appears!
Posts: 88
Joined: Thu Oct 07, 2010 11:56 am

Re: APOD: Peekskill Fireball Video: Johnstown (2011 Jan 23)

Post by zloq » Tue Jan 25, 2011 5:05 am

Chris Peterson wrote:In fact, there are some very good models now describing the behavior of meteors in the atmosphere.
I'm sorry - but that is only a statement of your opinion of models - not a statement of models themselves.

The issue isn't terminal velocity vs. hypervelocity - it is terminal velocity vs. something well above terminal velocity - which could be much less than hypervelocity - but still a strong departure from the terminal velocity estimate for impact.

I don't doubt that most meteorites hit near terminal velocity - but not all do. And when it comes to the temperature of a just-landed meteorite, particularly an iron one, there are many scenarios and many unknowns. The fact that "something previously considered impossible" could happen very recently is just one indication of that.

zloq

User avatar
Chris Peterson
Abominable Snowman
Posts: 18596
Joined: Wed Jan 31, 2007 11:13 pm
Location: Guffey, Colorado, USA
Contact:

Re: APOD: Peekskill Fireball Video: Johnstown (2011 Jan 23)

Post by Chris Peterson » Tue Jan 25, 2011 5:52 am

zloq wrote:I'm sorry - but that is only a statement of your opinion of models - not a statement of models themselves.
I'm not sure what that means. I only pointed out that there are now some very complex models describing the behavior of meteoroids throughout their atmospheric phase, and those models have been validated against light curves, radar data, and in one case, a body tracked from space to a strewn field.
The issue isn't terminal velocity vs. hypervelocity - it is terminal velocity vs. something well above terminal velocity - which could be much less than hypervelocity - but still a strong departure from the terminal velocity estimate for impact.
In fact, that's not the case. The conditions under which a meteoroid can be at anything other than terminal velocity below about 20 km are extremely rare. These are going to be very unusual, very uncommon events. I think what is being discussed here are much more typical meteors and meteorites- which includes Peekskill (which certainly impacted at terminal velocity).
I don't doubt that most meteorites hit near terminal velocity - but not all do. And when it comes to the temperature of a just-landed meteorite, particularly an iron one, there are many scenarios and many unknowns. The fact that "something previously considered impossible" could happen very recently is just one indication of that.
As I said earlier, many things are possible. But the typical scenario is just that... typical. Irons are so rare that actual reports of temperature are not significant. Theory says they should be near ambient on the surface, but warm in the center, meaning that if they are felt a few minutes after a fall, they will probably be warm or hot. Stony meteorites should generally be near ambient on the surface, and cool in the center. There are a number of reports describing temperature of stones, and most describe them as cool. That said, there are enough variables that either of these generalizations could fail.
Chris

*****************************************
Chris L Peterson
Cloudbait Observatory
https://www.cloudbait.com

zloq
A wild zloq appears!
Posts: 88
Joined: Thu Oct 07, 2010 11:56 am

Re: APOD: Peekskill Fireball Video: Johnstown (2011 Jan 23)

Post by zloq » Tue Jan 25, 2011 6:40 am

Chris Peterson wrote:
zloq wrote:I'm sorry - but that is only a statement of your opinion of models - not a statement of models themselves.
I'm not sure what that means. I only pointed out that there are now some very complex models describing the behavior of meteoroids throughout their atmospheric phase, and those models have been validated against light curves, radar data, and in one case, a body tracked from space to a strewn field.
Unless you have your own published research developing or applying these models, you may not be aware of their limitations - particularly in a complex fragmentation event. You seemed unaware of decades of modeling of meteoroid temperatures, which suggests a disconnect from the relevant literature.
Chris Peterson wrote:As I said earlier, many things are possible. But the typical scenario is just that... typical. Irons are so rare that actual reports of temperature are not significant.
I am not talking about typical events at all. I am addressing the possibility that a meteorite could be either very cold, luke warm, or very hot to the touch. From what I have read, in literature cited earlier, I think cold is very unlikely and warm is probably typical - but very hot is not unreasonable, particularly for iron.
Chris Peterson wrote:Theory says they should be near ambient on the surface, but warm in the center, meaning that if they are felt a few minutes after a fall, they will probably be warm or hot. Stony meteorites should generally be near ambient on the surface, and cool in the center.
What specific paper are you citing here - specifically that iron meteorites will be ambient on the surface and warm inside? Why would stony ones be cool inside? What "theory" are you referring to?

zloq

Post Reply