No Black Hole Or Magnetic Monopole: Tunguska Really Was a Meteor 128
davide-nature writes "The mysterious blast that flattened 2,000 square km of a remote Siberian forest in 1908 has been blamed on the most bizarre causes, such as an exotic elementary particle left over from the Big Bang, a black hole or, of course, aliens, including in the double-episode 'Tunguska' of The X-Files. But a new analysis of tiny rock samples suggests that a more mundane explanation — a meteor exploding in the atmosphere — may be the right one. The blast is estimated to have packed between 3 and 5 megatons, 10 times the energy of the meteor that exploded over Russia earlier this year."
Well I'm Glad That's Solved (Score:3, Funny)
Now I can go back to being terrified about terrorists. The black hole thing really had me pissing myself.
Re: (Score:1)
they do. It's called syria.
Re:Antimatter (Score:1)
Which would have been more interesting than the ho-hum "just a meteor" explanation.
Hm, wasn't aware there was any controversy (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Hm, wasn't aware there was any controversy (Score:5, Informative)
Re: (Score:2)
Kudos. You went fishing and filled your stringer.
Re: (Score:2)
That's a plumb line, Bob.
But a plum pie is tastier than plumb pi. Which makes no sense at all.
Re: (Score:2)
easy way for you to make a 90 degree angle.
1 get a rope make it into a circle and mark it into 12 even units
2 plant a peg where you want the 90 degree angle to be
3 run the line along where you want one of the walls to be and stop at 3 units and plant a second peg
4 run the line out to 8 units and then plant your third peg (there are 5 units between peg 2 and 3)
5 there will be 4 units left.
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Hm, wasn't aware there was any controversy (Score:5, Insightful)
How would they know the sticks were at a 90 degree angle?
How did the Romans figure out how to build the aqueducts, and great feats of engineering? Mathematics+trial and error. The belief that only 'advanced people' could build things like that is an unbelievable amount of hubris. Being realistic, we really don't know how many dark ages we've passed through, except those that really stand out.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Well, it couldn't have been too many, because fossils.
Let's take oh the last 10k years, then burn 50-70% of the advancements every 500 years give or take a bit. Tell me how many times you'd be crawling back up and over the same path again.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
You believe that the only possible form of advanced human culture involves technologies that destroy ecosystems and leave huge piles of trash behind?
That it is a pathetically limited view of human capabilities.
Re: (Score:2)
The hunters and gatherers who lived before left their traces in form of junk and bones from eaten animals. It is known that they lived in small groups and small total numbers.
Sorry
Re: (Score:2)
The neolithic violins, oboes, xylophones, ocarinas and drum sets leave very little evidence in the archaeological record, and much of what little is left has been easy to dismiss as pieces of kid's toys, or ornaments: minor details that signify nothing. Choral groups and dance troupes and story tellers leave no evidence behind them, none at all. And yet, outside of those who have put on technology blinders, intricate forms of music and performing arts are considered to be advanced forms of culture.
Then the
Re: (Score:2)
I think what is required to form an advanced culture is that people are not busy all their time just with surviving. It requires a stable food supply that does not eat up all their time. And this food supply must be protected somehow from people who are more poor, who would take it otherwise. Also, it requires a certain number of people. A small village will not develop and maintain an advanced culture on its own.
The way this happened was by using agriculture,
Re: (Score:2)
But still this was far away from the development status of the middle age. And the disc also shows a problem: after a few generations it ended up as part of the shiel
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
You believe that there has been an epoch with an advanced culture with lots of large buildings, and archaeologists completely missed that?
That's not what I'm saying at all, rather that we simply don't know how far civilizations have advanced over the last 10,000+ years. What was gained, lost, destroyed, carried over, rediscovered. Realistically, Troy was thought to be a myth as well. Well right up until this century, not only did we find 1 "lost city of Troy" we've found 5 or 6 of them--all in the same spot, and are pretty sure there's more buried under the original.
Re:Hm, wasn't aware there was any controversy (Score:5, Informative)
How would they know the sticks were at a 90 degree angle? Aliens remain the simplest explanation without resorting to geometric constructions(which are hard)...
A right angle is one of the simplest geometric constructions there is. You can construct the perpendicular to a line at any point with three applications of a compass (which can be as simple as a marking device on the end of a string) and one use of a straightedge.
http://www.mathopenref.com/constperplinepoint.html [mathopenref.com]
There is also the 3-4-5 right triangle, which only requires the ability to produce edges which are integer multiples of a reference length.
Hey! He started it! (Score:2)
I didn't ask for him to pronounce me his enemy. Now I'm a troll?
Where did you guys go to moderator school?
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:3)
You and the posters above you need to fix your sarcasm detectors. They were joking...
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
when did you last check the batteries in your "batshit crazy" detector?
I believe you'll find that those run on a mixture of zero point energy and unicorn farts. /dev/zero for that part.
Trust me on this one. Mine's on the fritz and I'm working up a new fuel cell charger using
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
If you want real power you need to pipe dev/zero and dev/random simultaneously to dev/null. Only then can you create more power than you use.
Re: (Score:2)
Roy Underhill: You're making a square, I've got to ask, how did you make that first square?
Chris Schwarz: I shot it on a shooting board.
Roy Underhill: How did you get the shooting board square?
Chris Schwarz: I used somebody else's shooting board.
Re:Hm, wasn't aware there was any controversy (Score:4, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
How would they know the sticks were at a 90 degree angle? Aliens remain the simplest explanation without resorting to geometric constructions(which are hard)
but how would the aliens know how to make a 90 degree angle? OMG! even the aliens have aliens, it's worse than i thought!
Re: (Score:2)
3 - 4 - 5 triangles. Which is really easy to do once you figure out the papyrus cord trick.
Re: (Score:2)
Clearly the Tunguska explosion was the result of a Sasquatch convincing the Loch Ness Monster to try chewing tobacco.
Either that or Mikey traveled time when he tried the pop rocks and cola.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
You are way off. This was clearly a trial run for the World Trade Center attack. If the Kennedy Assassination hadn't happened, we'd have had Mafia hitmen doing the deed on 9/11.
Re: (Score:3)
Wasn't aware there was any controversy about this. I always thought it was believed to be a meteor or comet. Of course, I underestimated the power of human imagination.
I think there was a tiny window of doubt because no large remnant could be found, but 'icy comet fragment' and 'explosion at altitude' were always plausible explanations for that, even before the Chelyabinsk meteor convincingly demonstrated the latter.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Aliens come here by skipping dimensions. They get up, have their coffee, jump into Mr. Dimension, and bingo, they're here to annoy us Earthlings with anal probes. The only interesting part is that no one knows what they get out it except a few yucks: Hey Zaphod, you'll never guess what I found.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Some had thought it was a comet, but here's the thing: people would have distinctly seen the "tail" of even a small comet as it approached the Earth, entered the atmosphere, and then detonated over Tunguska. The detonating meteor theory makes more sense, since you normally can't see the meteor with the naked eye before it enters the atmosphere and if the small meteor enters the atmosphere at a shallow angle at 35,000 to 40,000 mph, the atmospheric friction would be strong enough to cause the small meteor to
Re: (Score:2)
Some had thought it was a comet, but here's the thing: people would have distinctly seen the "tail" of even a small comet as it approached the Earth,
Comet's tails tend to fade away as the surface volatiles get used up.
Best explanation for Tunguska (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
It's not blocked.
Re: (Score:2)
Maybe the AC just thinks he's in the US (and is wrong)? I'm pretty sure I am and the link worked fine for me. Wait, maybe I'm the one who is wrong?!?
Re: (Score:2)
It is blocked in France, however.
Re:Even better explanation for Tunguska? (Score:1)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=spsnQWtsUFM
Great documentary and sound theory but the music did not inspire me.
So I made a version of my own.
Here is my version.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NHA9BkCAvMM [youtube.com]
It's amazing (Score:2, Interesting)
It's amazing that so many people preferred/prefer to believe that black holes or UFO's were the cause of the Tunguska event. Why is it so hard, for some people, to believe the most probable cause, a meteor, was the cause? Just looking at the moon shows that meteor impacts are not uncommon.
Re:It's amazing (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Because, like most conspiracy theories, believing in them makes you feel cleverer than the sheeple around you.
I don't accept that hypothesis. There are much easier beliefs to make you feel superior without being mocked so much. One could become a wine-buff / audiophile / art-lover, join a small religion, join a worthy political group, or even drive a Prius.
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Because, like most conspiracy theories, not believing in them makes you actually cleverer than the conspiracy theorists around you.
Too easy.
Re: (Score:2)
As an example, I saw a doco once called "The sidewalk astronomer", basically the guy would set up a decent telescope on a city street (LA, IIRC) and invite people to have a free look at either the moon or the sun. The vast majority of people were appreciative of th
Re: (Score:2)
It's amazing that so many people preferred/prefer to believe that black holes or UFO's
I think it is an unfortunate side-effect of the religion gene. Evolution favoured certain kinds of irrational belief, and like religion, belief in aliens rarely occurs in isolation, but in geographical and social clusters.
Too much space junk (Score:3)
Only in recent years has it become clear how much loose rock is floating around this solar system. Big hits are rare, but near misses of objects in the multi-ton range are not.
Re: (Score:1)
Dash cam video (Score:3)
Re:megatons != megatonnes of TNT (Score:4, Informative)
*facepalm* "Megaton" and "megatonne" are the same thing they are just variant spellings. They both mean 1 million ton(nes). The term is also used to refer to 1 million ton(ne)s of TNT as in the measure of TNT equivalence, but the distinction you claim does not exist.
Re: (Score:1)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tonne [wikipedia.org]
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Short_ton [wikipedia.org]
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ton [wikipedia.org]
Interesting read. I did not know that a ton (in the US) does not weigh the same as a tonne or a ton (in UK), though they are all measures of weight. Both can also be used for measure of energy through equivalence with a mass of TNT.
Fascinating language English is.
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Tons are not interchangeable, such as the 2000-pound variant, the 2240-pound variant, and the assorted volumes used in measuring ship size (not to be confused with tons displacement, also used in measuring ship size, which can be the megagram one or the 22400-pound one). I'm not even considering the megagram here.
Re: (Score:2)
The difference is that you pronounce megatonne with a British accent, otherwise no one can understand you.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
Unfortunately, megatons as used in the summery is a unit of weight.
Actually, no, as used in the summary, it's a unit measuring explosive force. The author assumes the reader is a competent speaker of the English language, where many words have multiple meanings that are distinguished from one another by the context in which they are used. Alas, on the internets, you find a great many people do not speak or understand English competently... including many for whom it's their native language. Go figure...
Re: (Score:2)
We're not in Known Space, Toto! (Score:2)
Bull hockey (Score:1)
It was an interdimensional cross rip
Oblig... (Score:2)
Monopoles were common before 1890s (Score:3, Funny)
Re: (Score:1)
Does that mean we're going to have more of those fake-tree cellular towers? I like the monopoles better.
Re: (Score:2)
No mention of the east or west magnetic poles.... It's A ConsPiracy!
Meteor? (Score:2)
Meteoroid!
Re: (Score:3)
Meteoroids are in space; meteors burn up (or explode?) in the atmosphere, meteorites strike earth.
Re: (Score:2)
A meteor is the visible phenomenon, a 'shooting star'.
Re: (Score:2)
Man I love people who offer opinions about language without even checking the most basic references. (Which, in my experience, is about 95% of all self-appointed "grammar nazis").
Collins English Dictionary:
meteor n
1. (Astronomy) a very small meteoroid that has entered the earth's atmosphere. Such objects have speeds approaching 70 kilometres per second
2. (Astronomy) Also called shooting star or falling star; the bright streak of light appearing in the sky due to the incandescence of such a body heated by f
Discussion is over (Score:1)
Godwin! I saw it first! What did I win?
Dyatlov Pass Incident - that's some strange stuff (Score:1)
Anyone here ever hear about the Dyatlov Pass Incident [wikipedia.org] in Russia?
Now that is a truly interesting, bizarre, and difficult to understand/explain happening...
Re: (Score:2)
He usually does a good job at covering the evidence and aht it means for the different theories.
Who knew? Everyone! (Score:2)
In other news, the explosion was said not to be caused by a teapot bearing the label "made on earth".
subject (Score:2)
Other things that probably didn't cause the Tunguska event: demons, kangaroos, cell phone radiation, the moon hitting your eye like a big pizza pie.
Occam's Razor (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Well duh.... Since when has Occam's Razor been dead? Why do crackpot theories even get mentioned when the simplest explanation (meteor) is ignored?
Not dead, it's just that he decided to go five blades [theonion.com].
A big ball of dust (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
I believe that most asteroids are just a huge dust ball held together by gravity, no big rocks, just lots and lots of small particles gathering around a small core. With that view of an asteroid, an explosion in the atmosphere would be expected, and almost no solids would reach the ground.
And the evidence that supports this belief, and doesn't also support other beliefs, is?