[meteorite-list] Another awful meteorite-related TV event

From: lebofsky at lpl.arizona.edu <lebofsky_at_meteoritecentral.com>
Date: Wed, 1 Jul 2009 19:03:46 -0700 (MST)
Message-ID: <8dc0bd125d3f09b1a045d9fcc01c4f51.squirrel_at_webmail.lpl.arizona.edu>

Hi Sterling:

I will admit that, at first, I got the wrong asteroid (though now more
interesting composition) and I am never one to say you are wrong, but...

YOU ARE WRONG!!!!!

Sorry, that felt good!

If you go by Wikipedia, you lost 3 zeros 1x10^18 bit 1X10^15. It would be
had to believe that a 100-km diameter object (give or take) would make a
40-km hole in the ground unless it was going real slow and hit a really
hard surface.

Somthing that big would probably make a hole 1000 km or so across (at
least), which would make it a bad day even for the roaches.

Oh, did I forget to mention:

You are wrong! It is a rare day that I get to say that to you Sterling,
sorry.

Larry

> Hi, List,
>
> To quantify that impact, I went and ran the numbers
> through the online Impact Calculator that uses the
> Jay Melosh model:
> http://www.lpl.arizona.edu/impacteffects/
>
> If 216 Kleopatra is 220 km x 100 km x 100 km, its
> volume is 17,278,875.96 km^3 or a total of (take a
> deep breath) 1,778,875,960,000,000 m^3. That's
> 1.7 quadrillion cubic meters and its mass would be at
> least 3.5 quadrillion metric tons. (Dogbone and Potato
> asteroids have lots of voids and a high porosity.)
>
> No, wait! It's 114 Kassandra? Get your Apocalypses
> straight, people!
>
> The volume of 114 Kassandra is less than Kleopatra:
> 523,598,644,700,000 cubic meters. The mass of
> 114 Kassandra, if rock, has to be at a minimum of
> 1,500,000,000,000,000 tons, although some sources
> say it's only 1,000,000,000,000,000. That big number
> is a Quadrillion tons, in case you want to know.
>
> OK, it's Kassandra! Smaller, lighter. Really puny.
> I gave it an intercept velocity of 47 km/s, a little
> slow for an eccentric orbit from the Asteroid Zone,
> and an incidence angle of 45 degrees.
>
> The energy of the collision is 1.20 x 10^24 Joules
> or 268,000,000 MegaTons TNT. The Calculator says
> "The average interval between impacts of this size
> somewhere on Earth during the last 4 billion years
> is 360,000,000 years."
>
> That energy is the equivalent of an explosion created
> by detonating a nuclear arsenal 1800 times bigger
> than the entire nuclear arsenals of all the nations of
> the world -- at once.
>
> The final crater diameter is 39.5 km or 24.5 miles;
> its final depth is 0.895 km or 0.556 miles. That seems
> oddly small for something so big. Why is that? Well,
> the Calculator says that the final crater is replaced
> by a large, circular melt province. The volume of the
> target melted or vaporized is 6410 cubic km or 1540
> cubic miles. The melt volume is 2.87 times the
> crater volume
>
> If 114 Kassandra hit Los Angeles, you'd probably be
> alright (for a while) if you were in New York City (or
> Boston). You'd be alright, that is, if you can withstand
> the shock wave which, at that distance, would have
> a wind velocity of 140 mph, or a hurricane-level
> Force Nine Gale on the Beaufort Scale. Where I live,
> it'll be over 205 mph.
>
> The real problem, I suspect, is in the vaporization of
> a substantial percentage of that "melt province." If
> 10% of the rock vaporized, or 1.5 trillion tons of rock
> vapor would be distributed very quickly through the
> atmosphere at temperatures of more than 2000
> degrees F. That quantity of rock vapor amounts to
> about 20,000 tons of rock vapor per square mile
> of the Earth's surface.
>
> The Impact Calculator does not discuss the contribution
> of the asteroid to the mass of rock vapor. I would suggest
> that at least 1% of it would survive as "mere" rock vapor
> (instead of plasma) -- that's an additional ten trillion tons,
> raising the distribution to 110,000 tons of rock vapor per
> square mile of the Earth's surface (about 190,000,000
> square miles).
>
> I suggest a very study, fireproofed umbrella would
> be a good idea if you plan on going out...
>
> This is an impact at least 30 to 50 times worse than
> the Chicxulub Impact which, it has been suggested,
> burned most of the vegetation off the planet with its
> rock vapor plume. 114 Kassandra's effect could only
> be characterized as the "Krispy Kritter" impact.
>
> It sounds like a a lousy environment in which to
> stage a mini-series. But... That's Entertainment!
>
>
>
> Sterling K. Webb
> -----------------------------------------------------------------------
> ------ Original Message -----
> From: <lebofsky at lpl.arizona.edu>
> To: <MeteorHntr at aol.com>
> Cc: <meteorite-list at meteoritecentral.com>
> Sent: Wednesday, July 01, 2009 12:03 PM
> Subject: Re: [meteorite-list] Another awful meteorite-related TV event
>
>
> If Kleopatra were to hit the Earth (at least that is what I get out of
> the
> main page), we would be in big trouble. For those of you who do not
> remember, 216 Kleopatra, thanks to radar observations, looks very much
> like a big dog bone, 220 kilometers long and 100 kilometers across.
>
> Larry
>
> -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Darren Garrison" <cynapse at charter.net>
> To: "Meteorite List" <meteorite-list at meteoritecentral.com>
> Sent: Wednesday, July 01, 2009 11:38 AM
> Subject: [meteorite-list] Another awful meteorite-related TV event
>
>
>> http://www.movieweb.com/news/NEn3LrswY8Zyro
>> ______________________________________________
>> http://www.meteoritecentral.com
>> Meteorite-list mailing list
>> Meteorite-list at meteoritecentral.com
>> http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
>
> ______________________________________________
> http://www.meteoritecentral.com
> Meteorite-list mailing list
> Meteorite-list at meteoritecentral.com
> http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
>
Received on Wed 01 Jul 2009 10:03:46 PM PDT