Where are ANY of the impactors?
-
- Commander
- Posts: 807
- Joined: Thu Jul 21, 2005 2:57 pm
- Location: On a boat near Tacoma, WA, usa
- Contact:
Like this http://www.mathie.org.uk/brian/gallery/ ... me_grounds
but in a single circular structure
but in a single circular structure
-
- Asternaut
- Posts: 1
- Joined: Fri Dec 01, 2006 10:59 pm
- Location: Cambridge, MA
I don't know if we should expect to see impactors (or remnants) in craters on the moon or mars - how would you identify one from an image? Wouldn't those that survive impact bury themselves or be buried by material falling into the crater? - but it seemed to me that the Apollo missions might have produced some work on objects striking the moon. Turns out they did:
http://adsabs.harvard.edu/cgi-bin/nph-b ... db_key=AST
http://adsabs.harvard.edu/cgi-bin/nph-b ... db_key=AST
Some folks at U. of Chicago looked at rock samples picked up by several missions and identified meteoritic materials in them. A quote: "The asteroid belt is an acceptable source of nearly all bodies yet characterized."
http://adsabs.harvard.edu/cgi-bin/nph-b ... db_key=AST
http://adsabs.harvard.edu/cgi-bin/nph-b ... db_key=AST
Some folks at U. of Chicago looked at rock samples picked up by several missions and identified meteoritic materials in them. A quote: "The asteroid belt is an acceptable source of nearly all bodies yet characterized."
-
- Commander
- Posts: 807
- Joined: Thu Jul 21, 2005 2:57 pm
- Location: On a boat near Tacoma, WA, usa
- Contact:
- THX1138
- Emailed Bob; Got a new title!
- Posts: 305
- Joined: Sat Nov 19, 2005 9:27 am
- AKA: Wile-e-coyote super genius
- Location: San Luis Obispo
- Contact:
Bottom line…….should we expect to see some remains of the LCROSS
Impactor that NASA plans to strike the moon with.
Or will it be vaporized? Covered over by the tons of falling debris? Be submerged deep under the surface? Or strewn about in many directions from point of impact?
Granted it’s not a chunk of ice, rock, fragmented iron or any other possible meteorite type that would naturally be pulverized. “ Being that it will be of a metal of one sort or another, But it should at least allow us some frame of reference….No?
What exactly was left of the impactor that struck “ what was it “ Temple 1?
From what I can see in the before and after……there is nothing except one big crater.
I never met a weapon I didn’t like ( 1989 ) Ronald Regan
Impactor that NASA plans to strike the moon with.
Or will it be vaporized? Covered over by the tons of falling debris? Be submerged deep under the surface? Or strewn about in many directions from point of impact?
Granted it’s not a chunk of ice, rock, fragmented iron or any other possible meteorite type that would naturally be pulverized. “ Being that it will be of a metal of one sort or another, But it should at least allow us some frame of reference….No?
What exactly was left of the impactor that struck “ what was it “ Temple 1?
From what I can see in the before and after……there is nothing except one big crater.
I never met a weapon I didn’t like ( 1989 ) Ronald Regan
- THX1138
- Emailed Bob; Got a new title!
- Posts: 305
- Joined: Sat Nov 19, 2005 9:27 am
- AKA: Wile-e-coyote super genius
- Location: San Luis Obispo
- Contact:
On another note, considering the fact that many of the objects we call comets, meteorites, planets and moons seem to have lots of either water or are made up of frozen water ice. I would suggest that it’s safe to assume that the impactors are part of the craters they formed or have since evaporated.
-
- Commander
- Posts: 807
- Joined: Thu Jul 21, 2005 2:57 pm
- Location: On a boat near Tacoma, WA, usa
- Contact:
- THX1138
- Emailed Bob; Got a new title!
- Posts: 305
- Joined: Sat Nov 19, 2005 9:27 am
- AKA: Wile-e-coyote super genius
- Location: San Luis Obispo
- Contact:
Hi CC, Abr. Chains
I assure you that there nothing on earth or in heaven that I would enjoy more than…..That is besides my ex-wife being,,,,,,,,,,,never mind.
Than finding rock solid proof that some of the craters we see were created in an un-natural fashion. Left over from a galactic war long ago…..Hmmm
Possible but not probable, and I’m sadder than you would believe, to have to say that. “ Where are any of the debris “
I assure you that there nothing on earth or in heaven that I would enjoy more than…..That is besides my ex-wife being,,,,,,,,,,,never mind.
Than finding rock solid proof that some of the craters we see were created in an un-natural fashion. Left over from a galactic war long ago…..Hmmm
Possible but not probable, and I’m sadder than you would believe, to have to say that. “ Where are any of the debris “
-
- Commander
- Posts: 807
- Joined: Thu Jul 21, 2005 2:57 pm
- Location: On a boat near Tacoma, WA, usa
- Contact:
Considering that there are so many craters, say on Iapetus for example, and then there are none on other bodies, or very few by comparison, that is very odd. That most of the craters on Iapetus seem to be geometrically shaped is also very odd. What is an even stranger thought; what if these craters are predominately, as you say, formed in an un-natural fashion with only a few being "natural". I find that thought to be NOT enjoyable myself.
And, still no impactors showing up, , hmmmmmmm![Wink :wink:](./images/smilies/icon_wink.gif)
And, still no impactors showing up, , hmmmmmmm
![Wink :wink:](./images/smilies/icon_wink.gif)
"It's not what you know, or don't know, but what you know that isn't so that will hurt you." Will Rodgers 1938
I am not sure about the validity of this image
impactor? on the moon?
http://www.boredstop.com/moonhi.htm
edit: some of these craters seem quite shallow, and although most likely ancient, no impactors? low denisty impacts at high velocities?
impactor? on the moon?
http://www.boredstop.com/moonhi.htm
edit: some of these craters seem quite shallow, and although most likely ancient, no impactors? low denisty impacts at high velocities?
I,d rather have a bottle in front of me, that a frontal lobotomy
- THX1138
- Emailed Bob; Got a new title!
- Posts: 305
- Joined: Sat Nov 19, 2005 9:27 am
- AKA: Wile-e-coyote super genius
- Location: San Luis Obispo
- Contact:
Yes makc, BMAONE23 is correct, In overview, I take it that you have never had the pleasure of giving away half of everything you own.
None the less if you consider the fact that the ex may just visit this site and recognize that THX1138 is me. It might not be prudent to say
“ Boiled in oil “ As apposed to ,,,,,,,,,,
Ooopps
None the less if you consider the fact that the ex may just visit this site and recognize that THX1138 is me. It might not be prudent to say
“ Boiled in oil “ As apposed to ,,,,,,,,,,
Ooopps
- geckzilla
- Ocular Digitator
- Posts: 9180
- Joined: Wed Sep 12, 2007 12:42 pm
- Location: Modesto, CA
- Contact:
But you guys use them everywhere and you've still dodged the question of why not they are commas and not any other form of punctuation. It is obvious what they were intended to do in this case but that's not really what I want to know. Anyway, I'm going to be calling the comma protection agency. It's apparent to me you are abusing the poor little commas.
-
- G'day G'day G'day G'day
- Posts: 2881
- Joined: Fri Nov 18, 2005 8:04 am
- Location: Sydney Australia
Hello All
Ok,,,,,,,,,,,,,,away with commars
and in with
+++++++++++++
or
==============
or
--------------------------
or
]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]
does it make a difference.
Sorry=============== I have been away discussing Electric Universe and Plasma Cosmology and the Z-pinch.
Ok,,,,,,,,,,,,,,away with commars
and in with
+++++++++++++
or
==============
or
--------------------------
or
]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]
does it make a difference.
Sorry=============== I have been away discussing Electric Universe and Plasma Cosmology and the Z-pinch.
Harry : Smile and live another day.