Russian meteorite 1,000 times bigger than originally thought!, page 4


Pages: <<  1    2    3    4  >>
ATS Members have flagged this thread 19 times


reply posted on 20-2-2013 @ 12:10 PM by JDmOKI
reply to post by Jefferton



I was speaking from my own point of view and my own opinion. Nor was it a solid opinion since I had no evidence to back it up. How am I spreading ignorance?

I know that you are spreading 4chan type HATE!!! back to your hole troll


reply posted on 20-2-2013 @ 12:15 PM by Deny777
Originally posted by CLPrime
reply to
post by Deny777



NASA has estimated the meteor's diameter to be 17 m. That's a radius of 8.5 m, a volume of 2572.44 m³, and a mass (based on the density you gave) of 10,933 tons.


Yep, my bad, made a rookie mistake using diameter instead of radius in that formula, that's what happens when you don't exercise your math regularly


reply posted on 20-2-2013 @ 02:30 PM by Aloysius the Gaul
Originally posted by NeoVain
reply to
post by Helious



1000 times bigger than originally thought? And they say 15 meters in diameters? That would mean they originally thought it was 1.5 cm big. It seems they where originally very dumb, or something doesn´t smell right here.


Yeah - you math!

1000 times the mass is not 1000 times the diameter - volume increases with the cube of the diameter (radius x 2) - so it is about 10 times the radius.

A 1.5m diameter sphere has a volume of about 1.8 cubic meters, and I saw somewher the figure of 4.25 t/m^3 for the material, so that's about 7.5 tonnes

Make the sphere 1.7m and you get 11 tonnes - yep - just a little increase in diameter - 0.2m, about 8", adds almost 3.5 tonnes!! (unless my math has suddently gone to carp!! )



reply posted on 20-2-2013 @ 05:55 PM by theabsolutetruth
reply to post by H1ght3chHippie



Initially it was thought to contain much more iron so would have been a heavier initial estimate. The presumed high iron content was suggested as the the reason it survived the mesosphere and got as far as it did.

However the scientific estimates and some of the reporting is possibly dubious so I expect more 'revelations' about how big / fast etc. it was soon.


reply posted on 20-2-2013 @ 07:51 PM by CLPrime
reply to post by openyourmind1262



Why, because NASA waited to get an accurate value instead of jumping all over preliminary estimates like everyone else?


reply posted on 20-2-2013 @ 09:02 PM by TheEnlightenedOne
Originally posted by Zcustosmorum
It truly is frightening stuff that this got through undetected, what if it was bigger still?

www.liveleak.com...



Thanks for the link.
I now know that if I see something like that pass by, I have about 2 minutes to get away from windows and protect my ears!


reply posted on 20-2-2013 @ 10:37 PM by Sandalphon
I sort of don't want to visit the link, because I know what's on the other side of that rainbow, and it ain't a pot of gold. I guarantee you at the end of the article, it won't make sense, or the information will be skewed to make someone look insane, or it will be fluff news, because of the nature of the presentation, that it comes from fox news.

I imagine it weighed 100 tons but it hit the ground feeling like 10,000 tons. That could the idea behind the force that was stronger than an atomic bomb, it was more powerful than a megaton bomb. What am I, a rocket scientist?

Somehow, putting the numbers on papers doesn't promote the idea of a competitive intelligence after the fact. I'm going to pull a Hillary Clinton and say: what difference does it make? It's already exploded a bunch of windows and is now a permanent addition to planet Earth.

Here is the response you will typically get from NASA after an event with no warning: "space is pretty big," and it's said with superior nerd attitude which implies that watching ginormous shooting stars is a waste of their time. And they doubly don't care to tell you when something dangerous is going to happen, unless it lands by one of their precious little military installations or within the view of the POTUS. Weren't they out of their 9 to 5 shift and sleeping in the USA when that skyturd came down in Russia? US isn't exactly going to confess monitoring Russian airspace anyways.

Just remember what they didn't tell their exploding shuttle crew and see how it follows their character to not care in this event.


reply posted on 21-2-2013 @ 06:59 AM by openyourmind1262
reply to post by Aloysius the Gaul



What if the thing would have hit a city and took out two or three million. Would NASA be so quick to say "we were wrong in the size estimate, our bad" I don't think so.Keep beleiving what is feed to you by the folks at NASA. They have a never ending supply of crap.


reply posted on 21-2-2013 @ 08:13 AM by CLPrime
reply to post by openyourmind1262



NASA wasn't wrong. The Russian scientists were wrong. NASA has been consistent in its size estimates. Feel free to take issue with NASA all you want, but you can't use this incident to do it. NASA are the only ones who haven't significantly changed their initial estimates.
Pages: <<  1    2    3    4  >>    ^^TOP^^



Israel angered over IAEA vote on nuclear arsenal
  Posted 13 days ago with 79 member flags
Neil Armstrong dead at age 82 - report
  Posted 17 days ago with 63 member flags
Judge orders release of detained Marine veteran
  Posted 19 days ago with 58 member flags
Birds hold \'funerals\' for dead
  Posted 10 days ago with 55 member flags
TSA agents swarm Ron Paul\'s plane, demand explosives check
  Posted 11 days ago with 47 member flags
Mysterious Changes in Ocean Salt Spur NASA Expedition
  Posted 1 days ago with 36 member flags
Ga. Murder Case Uncovers Terror Plot by Soldiers
  Posted 15 days ago with 32 member flags