PLEASE NOTE:
*
CCNet, 26/2003 - 7 March 2003
------------------------------
"For the past few weeks, impact aficionados have been abuzz
over the
apparent confirmation that a house-size object struck the Moon on
November
15, 1953. The bright flare captured that evening by Leon H.
Stuart's
backyard telescope matches the position of a small, fresh-
looking
crater recorded by a spacecraft three decades later. But a little
more
historical digging would have shown that there was no mystery to
begin
with. John E. Westfall has discovered that the bright blip seen
by
Clementine also appears in a series of telescopic plates taken
decades
before Stuart snapped his controversial exposure."
--J. Kelly Beatty, Sky & Telescope, 5 March 2003
(1) LUNAR FLASH DOESN'T PAN OUT
Sky & Telescope, 5 March 2003
(2) MEANWHILE AT THE NYT: "NEW EVIDENCE SUPPORTS MOON
BLAST"
The New York Times, 4 March 2003
(3) SIMULATIONS OF COLLISIONS SHED LIGHT ON INTERNAL STRUCTURE OF
ASTEROIDS
Andrew Yee <ayee@nova.astro.utoronto.ca>
(4) NEW MOONS FOR JUPITER
BBC News Online, 6 March 2003
(5) NEWTON WAS NOT A PROPHET OF DOOM
The Daily Telegraph, 4 March 2003
(6) FIREBALL OVER CENTRAL CANADA
CNews, 5 March 2003
(7) HANDLE WITH CARE: METEORITES STRIKE YATINUWARA AND WENNAPPUWA
Sunday Observer (Cylon ), 2 March 2003
(8) MEETING ON ASTEROIDS AND COMETS IN EUROPE
Stephen Laurie <stephen@laurieco.com>
(9) TECHNIQUES FOR ESTIMATING THE RISK OF SMALL AND MEDIUM
IMPACTS: HOW
ACCURATE ARE THEY?
E.P. Grondine <epgrondine@hotmail.com>
(10) AND FINALLY: THE END MIGHT BE NIGH IN 20 BILLION YEARS
Space.com, 6 March 2003
=============
(1) LUNAR FLASH DOESN'T PAN OUT
>From Sky & Telescope, 5 March 2003
http://skyandtelescope.com/news/current/article_890_1.asp>
By J. Kelly Beatty
March 5, 2003 | For the past few weeks, impact aficionados have
been abuzz
over the apparent confirmation that a house-size object struck
the Moon on
November 15, 1953. The bright flare captured that evening by Leon
H.
Stuart's backyard telescope matches the position of a small,
fresh-looking
crater recorded by a spacecraft three decades later. Bonnie J.
Buratti (Jet
Propulsion Laboratory) and Lane Johnson, a student at Pomona
College,
unearthed this 1½-kilometer-wide "smoking gun" in data
from the Clementine
orbiter, whose high-definition cameras mapped the entire Moon in
1994.
Although the annals of amateur astronomy chronicle hundreds of
such
transient lunar phenomena, almost all considered suspect by
professionals,
Stuart's event stands apart because it was both seen and
photographed. That
fact, together with the Clementine evidence, allowed Buratti and
Johnson to
make a convincing case in January's issue of the scientific
journal Icarus.
A press release even trumpeted "NASA Solves Half-Century Old
Moon Mystery."
But a little more historical digging would have shown that there
was no
mystery to begin with. John E. Westfall (Association of Lunar and
Planetary
Observers) has discovered that the bright blip seen by Clementine
also
appears in a series of telescopic plates taken decades before
Stuart snapped
his controversial exposure. In particular, Westfall notes, the
feature is
"pretty obvious" in photographs made with Mount
Wilson's 100-inch Hooker
telescope in 1919. It also turned up on plates taken in 1937 with
the
36-inch refractor at Lick Observatory and in others acquired with
Catalina
Observatory's 61-inch reflector in 1966.
"It's kind of disappointing," Buratti said when told of
Westfall's
revelation. "But it's more important to find that out."
In researching their
paper, she and Johnson had examined a few telescopic images for a
small
crater at the impact's presumed coordinates but found nothing. A
search of
Lunar Orbiter frames, taken during the 1960s, also turned up
empty. They
concluded that the candidate crater must be too small (roughly
0.8 arcsecond
across) to be resolved by ground-based efforts.
Even before Westfall came forward, doubts had been growing about
the
Stuart-Clementine connection. For one thing, Stuart reported that
the bright
flare lasted at least 8 seconds, an implausibly long fireball for
so small a
crater. "We now know that an event of that scale should last
no longer than
a second, but [Stuart] didn't," comments impact specialist
Alan W. Harris
(Space Science Institute).
A respected radiologist in Tulsa, Oklahoma, Leon H. Stuart
enjoyed observing
with his home-built 8-inch f/8 Newtonian telescope. At its upper
end is the
plate camera used to record his controversial lunar flare on the
evening of
November 15, 1953. Courtesy Jerry Stuart.
Other concerns were raised about the freshness of Buratti and
Johnson's
candidate crater. Solar-wind bombardment causes lunar material to
darken and
redden over time, but researchers believe such "space
weathering" takes
place slowly over millions of years. Thus, if 20-meter-wide
objects slam
into the Moon frequently (often enough to make Stuart's sighting
statistically plausible), then the lunar landscape should be
peppered with
100,000 bright, fresh-looking splashes - and it isn't. "You
can't have it
both ways," notes Harris.
Finally, the positional match wasn't as good as Buratti and
Johnson first
thought. Careful measurement of Stuart's image by Sky &
Telescope editors
Dennis di Cicco and Gary Seronik, as well as by Westfall, shows
that the
flare is centered a full 1°, or 30 km, from the Clementine
candidate.
So, if it wasn't a flashy impact, what did Leon Stuart see and
photograph a
half century ago? Some have suggested that it was a "point
meteor," headed
directly at the camera, but that is ruled out by the flare's
duration.
Moreover, the spot on the photographic plate is perfectly round,
arguing
against a stray reflection or emulsion defect. In 1967 Stuart's
original
underwent a battery of tests at the University of Arizona's Lunar
and
Planetary Laboratory. But today the whereabouts of the original
plate are
unknown, and without it the true mystery of "Stuart's
event" may never be
solved.
Copyright 2003 Sky Publishing Corp.
=============
(2) MEANWHILE AT THE NYT: "NEW EVIDENCE SUPPORTS MOON
BLAST"
>From The New York Times, 4 March 2003
http://www.nytimes.com/2003/03/04/science/space/04MOON.html
By HENRY FOUNTAIN
Humans have gazed at the Moon in wonder since ancient times, but
what Dr.
Leon Stuart observed one night in 1953 was more wonderful than
what anyone
had seen before or since.
Looking through his eight-inch telescope at his home near Tulsa,
Okla., Dr.
Stuart, a radiologist by profession but an astronomer by
avocation, saw and
photographed a bright flash on the Moon's surface.
Dr. Stuart was certain that he had witnessed a small asteroid
hitting the
Moon, the flash being the fireball from the event. An amateur
astronomy
journal published his photograph and report, and it has remained
a curiosity
over the years. While some scientists thought his explanation
plausible,
others were convinced that he saw an optical aberration or a much
closer
object, like a meteorite in Earth's atmosphere (or,
embarrassingly, an
airplane passing overhead).
Now new research shows that Dr. Stuart's flash on the Moon was no
flash in
the pan. An astronomer at NASA's Jet Propulsion Laboratory,
poring over
high-resolution lunar photographs, has found a fresh crater in
the precise
area where Dr. Stuart saw his flash....
===============
(3) SIMULATIONS OF COLLISIONS SHED LIGHT ON INTERNAL STRUCTURE OF
ASTEROIDS
>From Andrew Yee <ayee@nova.astro.utoronto.ca>
Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique
Paris, France
Researcher contact:
Patrick Michel
Observatoire de la Côte d'Azur
e-mail: michel@obs-nice.fr
Tel: +33 4 92 00 30 55
Contact INSU:
Philippe Chauvin
e-mail: philippe.chauvin@cnrs-dir.fr
Tel: +33 1 44 96 43 36
Press contact:
Martine Hasler
Tel: +33 1 44 96 46 35
e-mail: martine.hasler@cnrs-dir.fr
February 6, 2003
Simulations of collisions shed light on the internal structure of
asteroids
An international team of researchers led by Patrick Michel
(Observatoire de
la Côte d'Azur - CNRS, Nice) have carried out simulations of
asteroid
collisions. For the first time, such simulations have made it
possible to
provide information about the internal structure of asteroids
and, in
particular, have shown that the parent bodies from which asteroid
families
have originated must have been fragmented (and non-monolithic)
bodies or
stacked rocks. The formation of an asteroid family results from
the break-up
of such a body, which creates hundreds of thousands of fragments,
certain of
which could become dangerous asteroids and meteorites. These
findings also
show that the impact energy during a collision is highly
dependent upon the
internal structure of the target; this information is very useful
for the
development of a strategy of defense against the threat of an
impact with
the Earth. The researchers' results are published in the February
6, 2003,
issue of Nature and are featured on the journal's cover.
In the asteroid belt, which is located between Mars and Jupiter,
asteroid
families are concentrated groups of small bodies that share the
same
spectral properties. More than 20 families have been identified,
each family
believed to be fragments resulting from the break-up
of a large parent body in a regime where gravity, more than the
material
strength of the rock, is the key factor (*). The actual size and
velocity
distributions of the family members provide the main constraint
for testing
our understanding of the break-up process in this gravitational
context. A
new asteroid family, which bears the name of its largest member,
Karin, was
recently identified and studied. It is the youngest family
discovered to
date, and appears to have resulted from a collision around 5
million years
ago. This family provides a unique opportunity to study a
collisional
outcome that is relatively unaffected by phenomena such as
collisional
erosion and the dynamic diffusion of fragments, which, over time,
alter the
properties resulting directly from the collision.
Patrick Michel of the Cassini Laboratory (Observatoire de la
Côte d'Azur -
CNRS) and two of his colleagues from the Universities of Bern
(Switzerland)
and Maryland (USA), have developed numerical simulations of
collisions with
the aim of determining the classes of events that make it
possible to
reproduce the main characteristics of the Karin family. As the
results
depend to a large degree on the internal structure of the parent
body, they
were able to show that this family must have resulted from the
break-up of a
body that was originally full of fracture and/or empty zones,
rather than a
purely monolithic body. Their findings moreover indicate that all
the
members of this family are aggregates formed by the gravitational
re-accumulation of smaller fragments, and that certain of them
could have
been ejected on trajectories that cross the Earth's trajectory.
Since those
families that are already known and the oldest families share
similar
properties, the authors suggest that they are likely to have had
a similar
history.
This information concerning the internal structure of large
asteroids also
has consequences for the impact energy that would destroy them.
This is
useful not only to estimate the lifetime of these objects in the
asteroid
belt, but also in order to develop strategies that aim to
redirect such a
potentially dangerous asteroid.
Reference:
P. Michel, W. Benz & D.C. Richardson, Disruption of
fragmented parent bodies
as the origin of asteroid families, Nature Vol. 421, 608-611,
2003.
For more information about asteroid collisions, see: Press
release dated
November 22, 2001
http://www.cnrs.fr/cw/en/pres/compress/collisionsAsteroides.htm
=============
(4) NEW MOONS FOR JUPITER
>From BBC News Online, 6 March 2003
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/2825507.stm
By Dr David Whitehouse
BBC News Online science editor
Astronomers have announced the discovery of yet another new batch
of moons
in the Solar System - this time around Jupiter.
The new satellites bring Jupiter's tally to 47 compared with 30
for Saturn,
the planet with the second most number of moons.
Jupiter's new satellites were discovered in early February 2003
by Scott
Sheppard and David Jewitt of the University of Hawaii, US,
working with Jan
Kleyna of Cambridge University, UK.
They were found using the world's two largest digital cameras at
the Subaru
Telescope (8.3-metre diameter) and the Canada-France-Hawaii
(3.6-metre
diameter) telescopes on Mauna Kea in Hawaii.
The satellites were formally announced to the astronomical
community on 4
March.
The new moons are all small; two to four kilometres in size, and
orbit
Jupiter at great distances from the planet.
Two of the seven new satellites (S/2003 J1 and S/2003 J6) have an
orbit
around Jupiter that is in the same direction as Jupiter's spin).
The other five have distant so-called retrograde orbits like the
majority of
the known irregular satellites of Jupiter.
Copyright 2003, BBC
============
(5) NEWTON WAS NOT A PROPHET OF DOOM
The Daily Telegraph, 4 March 2003
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/opinion/main.jhtml?view=HOME&grid=P18&menuId=-1&menuItemId=-1&_requestid=242444
Sir - I regret that your report (Feb 22) on Isaac Newton's
beliefs failed to
put them into any historical context.
What is noteworthy about recent research is not that Newton was
an
"apocalyptic" thinker: all Protestant scholars in
17th-century Britain held
such views. The apocalyptic consensus is not difficult to
understand, given
that any departure from the literal reading of the Book of
Revelation was
considered heresy.
Edmond Halley, who was confronted with this accusation in 1691,
presented
papers to the Royal Society on "the necessity of the world's
coming to an
end", to prove "that I am not guilty of asserting the
eternity of the
world".
In Newton's days nearly everyone believed in heavenly retribution
and the
catastrophic end of the world. The Church worked hard to scare an
insubordinate flock, while political radicals prophesied cometary
disaster
and social upheaval.
Newton, in contrast, kept publicly quiet on the subject for most
of his
life. He endeavoured to discredit both camps by debunking their
shared
belief in impending doomsday.
In the unpublished manuscripts referred to, Newton did ponder the
end of the
world "in the year of the Lord 2060", but stressed:
"I mention this period
not to assert it, but only to show that there is little reason to
expect it
earlier, and thereby to put a stop to the rash conjectures of
interpreters
who are frequently assigning the time of the end, and thereby
bringing the
sacred prophecies into discredit as often as their conjectures do
not come
to pass. It is not for us to know the times and seasons which God
hath put
in his own breast."
By pushing back a tentative date for the apocalypse by more than
500 years
(if not advocating an indefinite point in time), Newton assailed
both an
over-zealous orthodoxy and political radicals whose fanaticism
had led to a
century of mayhem and who threatened the stability of British
society. Far
from being a prophet of doom, Newton calculatingly established
the
foundations of the scientific age that turned terrifying comets
into
predictable objects and wild fear-mongering into dispassionate
risk
analysis.
Dr Benny Peiser
Liverpool John Moores University
============
(6) FIREBALL OVER CENTRAL CANADA
>From CNews, 5 March 2003
http://www.canoe.ca/NationalTicker/CANOE-wire.Green-Fireball.html
Ontario, Quebec police get calls of "green things" in
sky; likely a fireball
TORONTO (CP) -- A green blaze that streaked through the skies
over Central
Canada on Wednesday night, promoting curious and concerned calls
to police,
was likely a fireball.
Richard Huziak, a member of the Royal Astronomical Society, said
it sounded
like people were treated to a bright meteor or fireball.
"It sounds like basically some sort of major natural
fireball. It's not
unusual to have fireballs," Huziak said Wednesday night.
Green is the most prominent colour of the fireballs, which are
brighter than
any celestial object other than the moon and sun, according to
the
Meteorites and Impacts Advisory Committee, a branch of the
Canadian Space
Agency.
The fireballs are often the size of a small car, Huziak said.
Because of their relatively large size, sometimes they can burn
brightly
enough to even turn off streetlights as they pass, he added.
Quebec provincial police got phone calls Wednesday night
describing a bright
object that flew through the sky for two to three seconds before
disappearing in a final burst of light.
Reports of seeing "several green things in the sky" are
intriguing because
it might mean multiple fireballs or that the fireball fragmented.
But
multiple fireballs are unlikely.
"A few reports need to come in for this event to be
characterized for
certain," he said. "Most people never see one in a
whole lifetime."
Copyright 2003, CNews
===========
(7) HANDLE WITH CARE: METEORITES STRIKE YATINUWARA AND WENNAPPUWA
>From Sunday Observer (Cylon ), 2 March 2003
http://www.sundayobserver.lk/2003/03/02/new22.html
by ANTON NONIS
The 2.5 kilogram meteorite which struck Kalugalatenna estate in
Muruthalawa,
Yatinuwara at approximately 11 pm on Wednesday has made many
wonder whether
the predictions of Lalith Wijewardene, a gemmologist from Matara,
have
finally come true. The strike in Yatinuwara was preceded by a
strike in
Wennappuwa on February 8 but was smaller.
Three months ago Wijewardene predicted that a meteorite would
strike a paddy
field or abandoned land at Nittambuwa in the Gampaha District.
Although the
actual site was a few kilometres away in Wennappuwa, many say he
can take
credit for predicting the event.
The February 8 meteorite strike was witnessed by Rosemary
Jacinta, a
resident of the area. She had heard a sound similar to that of a
leak in a
gas cylinder which had persisted for about a minute.
Colombo Campus Senior Physics lecturer Dr. Chandana Jayaratne
told the
`Sunday Observer' that the object was clearly a meteorite and not
any debris
from a satellite or the recently-destroyed American-Columbia
spacecraft as
thought by some.
The object measured 2.5 centimetres in one direction and 1.6 cm
in the other
and was of a stone-type substance.
Dr. Jayaratne has sent a portion of the meteorite to the National
Aeronautics and Space Administration NASA) for a thorough
investigation. On
the following day the Air Force reported that one of its Kafir
jets was hit
by an object while the aircraft was flying in the Wennappuwa area
at a
height of 15,000 feet, damaging one of the plane's window pane.
Some suspect
that the object could have been a meteorite striking the plane
and are
wondering whether there was any link with the previous day's
incident. The
pilot had not suffered injury.
According to Dr.Jayaratne, arrangements are being made to send a
part of the
meteorite that struck Yatinuwara to NASA for examination.
Dr. Jayaratne said that meteorites may strike either singly or in
packs.
These strikes may persist for more than a day at times which goes
to explain
the hit on the Kafir jet on February 8.
Meanwhile, Wijewardene claims that his predictions of earthquakes
have also
come true. These include Gujarat and Bangladesh in January, 2001,
and
another in Iraq.
Wijewardene has also predicted an earthquake occurring in Sri
Lanka this
year in the triangular area bordering Kotahena and Galle Face up
to
Moratuwa. He says that the earthquake would be of considerable
magnitude and
the tremor would be felt along the coastal belt in the triangle
up to a
considerable distance.
However, geologists dismissing the predictions say that no
earthquake has
ever been predicted. Nimal Ranasinghe of the directorate of
Geological
Survey and Mines Bureau explained that Wijewardene's prediction
was
surprising. "Predictions cannot be proved
scientifically", he said. He also
dismissed the meteorite strike as a 'mere coincidence'.
Wijewardene is not able to explain how he made such predictions,
He says it
could be an 'inborn talent' in him.
Copyright 2003, The Associated Newspapers of Ceylon Ltd.
===========
(8) MEETING ON ASTEROIDS AND COMETS IN EUROPE
>From Stephen Laurie <stephen@laurieco.com>
MACE 2003 - MEETING ON ASTEROIDS AND COMETS IN EUROPE
May 1-4 Costitx, Mallorca island, (Spain)
-Second Announcement and Call for Papers-
-------------------------------------------------------------
The "Meeting on Asteroids and Comets in Europe", MACE
2003, will be held
from May 1st to 4th at the Mallorca Observatory in Spain. If you
are
planning to attend and have not yet "registered",
please do so now. For this, you just have to write an email to:
mace2003@oam.es with the
following details
First name:
Last name:
Institution/Observatory:
E-mail:
Comments and suggestions:
Please be reminded that the deadline for abstract submission is
April 1st.
For more details please visit:
http://www.oam.es/oam/mace/intro.htm
The goals of the meeting are:
- To improve the technology and techniques of observing.
- To search for goals of small observatories in the future.
- To continue and improve the relations and the established
projects.
- To connect to other observers over borders and language
barriers.
The scientific programme will include invited, contributed talks
and
posters.
The topics that will be covered at MACE 2003 include:
- Projects and scientific results on minor planets.
- Advances in telescope design.
- Observing methods and future projects for small observatories.
- Robotic and remote observation and tools for reduction data.
Also some observational and data reduction "live"
sessions are planned.
The Scientific and Local Organizing Committee has proposed the
following
tentative programme:
PROGRAMME
>From evening of April 30, 2003 to May 1, at 12:00
Arrivals at Mallorca airport and free shuttle to the hotels in
Port Alcudia.
Accomodation.
May 1, Thursday
13:00 - Welcome reception. Official opening.
13:30 - Welcome cocktail and lunch
15:00 - Invited talk
15:30 - Talks 1
17:00 - Cofee Break
17:30 - Talks 2
20:00 - Dinner - Video projection: MACE 2002 farewell dinner!
22:00 - Transport to hotels
May 2, Friday
09:00 - Transport from hotels to meeting room
09:45 - Invited talk
10:15 - Talks 3
11:15 - Cofee break
11:45 - Talks 4
13:30 - Lunch
16:00 - Visit to the observatory of Mallorca and the Planetarium
16:30 - Audio-visual at the planetarium: observing tools at
the
Obs. of Mallorca
18:30 - Round table: observing and data processing tools
20:00 - Dinner
22:00 - Observing session
01:00 - Shuttle to hotels every hour
May 3, Saturday
10:00 - Transport from hotels to the meeting room
10:45 - Invited talk
11:15 - Talks 5
13:30 - Lunch
16:00 - Excursion - Valldemossa and Serra de Tramuntana
21:00 - Closing Dinner
01:00 - Shuttle to hotels every hour
May 4, Sunday
Departures. Shuttles from hotels to the airport of Mallorca.
Possibly half
day excursion to Palma, for participants departuring Sunday
evening.
SCIENTIFIC ORGANIZING COMMITTEE
Luciano Bittesini (Farra d'Isonzo Observatory) Italy
Korado Korlevic (Visnjan Observatory) Croatia
Stephen Laurie (Church Stretton Observatory) England
Jaime Nomen (OAM-Mallorca & Ametlla de Mar
Observatories) Spain
Petr Pravec (Ondrejov Observatory) Czech R.
Herbert Raab (Linz Observatory) Austria
Jure Skvarc (Crni vrh Observatory) Slovenia
Stefano Sposetti (Gnosca Observatory) Switzerland
Reiner Stoss (Starkenburg Observatory) Germany
Juraj Toth (Modra Observatory) Slovakia
LOCAL ORGANIZING COMMITTEE
Oscar Arratia (NEODyS team) Spain
Manolo Blasco (OAM-Mallorca Observatory) Spain
Vadim Burwitz (Max Planck institute &
OAM-Mallorca Observatory)
Antonio Garcia (OAM-Mallorca Observatory) Spain
Joan Guarro (OAM-Mallorca & Piera Observatories)
Spain
Jose-Luis Ortiz (Instituto de astrofisica de
Andalucia) Spain
Gabriel Pieras (Consell of Mallorca) Spain
Juan Rodriguez (OAM-Mallorca Observatory) Spain
Salvador Sanchez (OAM-Mallorca Observatory) Spain
Genny Sansaturio (NEODyS team) Spain
MEETING OFFICE
OAM-Observatorio Astronomico de Mallorca
Cami del Observatori s/n
Costitx, 07144 Mallorca
Spain
mace2003@oam.es
Tel: 34-689686557
34-971876019
Fax: 34-971876022
MEETING VENUE
MACE 2003 will be held in the Civic Center of the village
of Costitx, very
close to the Observatorio Astronomico de Mallorca, however, some
observational sessions will take place at the
Observatory and the Planetarium.
============================
* LETTERS TO THE MODERATOR *
============================
(9) TECHNIQUES FOR ESTIMATING THE RISK OF SMALL AND MEDIUM
IMPACTS: HOW
ACCURATE ARE THEY?
>From E.P. Grondine <epgrondine@hotmail.com>
Hello Benny -
As you might imagine, I have been following the recent discussion
between
Don Yeomans, Clark Chapman, Allan Harris, Joe Veverka and
yourself with some
interest. Reading the transcript, one of the things which really
strikes me
is how often "estimates" of the risks to mankind from
small and medium
impacts of both asteroids and comets are presented as being
"facts", without
any discussion of exactly how those estimates were arrived at, or
how
reliable those estimates are. Given the consequences of those
estimates,
perhaps they should be discussed a little more fully, and thus
this note.
What follows represents only my best understanding of the
situation, and
given both my abilities and the width of the field, it is likely
that it is
flawed. I offer it here only as a basis for further discussion.
ESTIMATES OF THE RISKS OF SMALL AND MEDIUM IMPACT BY CRATER
COUNTING
There are several techniques for arriving at estimates of small
and medium
impact, those types of impact most likely to occur within our
lifetimes. The
first of these techniques, of course, is simply counting the
craters on the
surfaces of some of the other bodies in our solar system. On some
of those
bodies, unlike the case on our Earth, there are no geological
processes
which rapidly remove the signs of small and medium impact.
I believe that the first time the crater counting method of
estimation was
used was by Gene Shoemaker, who due to funding limitations based
his
estimates on only a small part of the limited set of low
resolution lunar
imagery which was available to him in the early 1960's. It is now
2003, and
it is amazing that Shoemaker's estimates are still being used
some 40 years
later, when much higher resolution imagery of the surfaces of
many more
bodies is currently available.
Another amazing thing about Shoemaker's estimates is that they
have never
been adjusted, at least to my knowledge, to include any
correction for our
Moon's near-by large gravitational companion, the Earth. As my
knowledge
here is limited, perhaps the Italian astrodynamic team is much
more familiar
with this problem than I am, and could share with Conference
participants
any insights they might have on it.
Further, as was demonstrated most recently by the work on the
lunar impact
of 1954, the resolution of the lunar imagery which Shoemaker used
was so bad
that it was possible to miss 20 kiloton impacts. From this one
can conclude
that any estimates as to the small and medium impact hazard which
was
derived from the earlier low resolution imagery is of a pretty
limited
value.
Of course, the new Mars imagery could provide a way around both
the problem
of resolution and the problem of gravitational companion, but to
my
knowledge the efforts here are limited due to lack of funding. I
was
informed several years ago that there was a German team looking
in great
detail at a limited set of Mars imagery, but I have heard no
results from
them yet, and do not know if they are even still being funded.
Scott
Hubbard, the recently appointed Director of NASA's Ames Research
Center, is
fully aware of the impact hazard, and had given a high priority
to the
development of a computer program for automated crater counting
on surface
imagery from any body in our solar system, including Mars. Sadly,
Scott's
talents have quite rightly been re-allocated to the investigation
of the
failure of the space shuttle Columbia, and there are likely to be
no quick
answers there.
Finally, not only do we have new imagery of the surface of Mars,
but thanks
to the Galileo team's magnificent efforts, we now have detailed
imagery of
the surfaces of the planet sized moons orbiting Jupiter. I spoke
with the
Galileo team, and to my knowledge, funding to count the craters
in this
imagery is essentially $0.00.
Let me emphasis again that this is only my understanding of the
situation;
perhaps there is a Conference participant who is active in work
in this area
and who may take a few minutes to share his knowledge of it with
us.
ESTIMATES OF THE RISKS OF SMALL AND MEDIUM IMPACT BY GEOLOGY
Of course, not all of the craters on the Earth have been
subducted back into
the Earth's magma, or had their features erased by normal
weathering
processes. Given the value of the hydrocarbons which appear to
pool in the
fractures caused by these impacts, and the value of the rare
metals which
some of these impactors have delivered, there has been quite a
bit of work
done on the identification of the large impact craters preserved
here on the
Earth.
As the number of large craters which have been identified has
grown, several
problems have emerged. The first of these, which we know
from the research
done at Tunguska, is that the effects of small and medium impacts
are
relatively quickly weathered away. Added to this is the fact that
funding
for the geological investigation of the remains of small to
medium impacts
is non-existent for the most part.
Since direct geological investigation of small and medium craters
is not
funded, the only technique for estimating the risks of small and
medium
impact by geology is by finding the larger craters and then
"inferring" by
one means or another the small and medium impact risks.
Here techniques are
just now being developed for differentiating between asteroid and
comet
impact as the cause of each of these large craters, and again,
based on my
conversation with Dr Becker and her team, the funding for this
varies from
extremely limited to non-existent.
ESTIMATES OF THE RISKS OF SMALL AND MEDIUM IMPACT BY ASTRONOMY
Of course, no telescope is currently able to reliably
"see" the types of
bodies which cause small to medium impacts, those bodies 300-400
meters or
less in diameter. Thus estimates as to the populations of those
smaller
bodies are currently based on the observations of the larger
bodies. Feeding
the results of these observations of larger bodies into one or
another of
the available mathematical "sampling" techniques,
estimates have been formed
as to the total populations of these larger objects; those total
larger body
population "estimates" have then been used to
"infer" by one mechanical
means or another the total populations of smaller and medium
bodies.
Given the reflectivity and orbits of "dead" comet
fragments, both of which
make them for the most part unobservable, these small and medium
impact risk
estimates are usually based solely on the observations of the
larger
asteroids alone. Thus it is quite common to hear asteroid
astronomers state
the risks of small and medium impact as being solely those due to
the impact
of asteroids, speaking as though comets, their fragments, and
their impacts
do not exist. Unfortunately, from the direct observation of the
impact of
Comet Shoemaker-Levy 9 on Jupiter, we know that statements of the
total risk
which speak only of that arising from asteroids are rather
completely
without merit.
ESTIMATES OF THE RISKS OF SMALL AND MEDIUM IMPACT BY OBSERVATION
OF UPPER
ATMOSPHERE IMPACT
The detonations caused by the impacts of very small bodies with
the upper
atmosphere are regularly observed by early warning satellites. As
the bodies
observed here are much smaller than those which cause small to
medium ground
impacts, once again one or another means of inference has to be
applied to
that data to generate any estimates as to the populations and
risks arising
from those slightly larger bodies.
While this data provides some constraints on the estimates of the
risks of
small and medium impact which have been formed by other methods,
it is
common to hear this data used to support estimates which differ
by nearly an
order of magnitude. Given these statements claiming support, one
can
reasonably conclude that the upper atmosphere detonation data
must be of
limited value in forming a reliable estimate as to the risk of
small and
medium impact.
Work on de-classifying this data is well underway, as is work on
differentiating that data by causitive body, in other words the
detonations
are being sorted out by parent asteroid type or by dead comet
fragment.
ESTIMATES OF THE RISKS OF SMALL AND MEDIUM IMPACT BY ANTHROPOLOGY
Another method of estimating the risks of small and medium impact
is by
anthropological techniques, in other words by retrieving from the
historical
records the direct observations by man of earlier small and
medium impacts,
and then attempting to confirm or deny those reports through
field work by
teams of geologists and archaeologists. In other cases ancient
archaeological remains have been found which appear to have been
the result
of small and medium impacts, and then attempts have been made to
find
mentions of those events in the surviving historical records.
Due to the stench which this work acquired as a result of
Velikovsky's
nonsense (and in my opinion here one must agree with Morrison),
most
professionals avoid this area of research like the plague.
Usually they have
entered into it only when the data before them will admit of no
other
explanation, and quite literally forces them into considering
impact as the
cause of that data. The professionals realize that if they do
complete work
in the area, they will then face the problem of review by peers
who share
the same prejudices which they themselves used to hold, and
worse, review by
supposed experts who often make statements such as "...
People are not
killed individually, or by the hundreds or even the thousands, by
impacts."
Finally, since funding for work of this type is exactly zero, the
professionals face the realization that any research which they
may consider
doing will have to be financed by other means.
I want to digress briefly here into an immediate example of the
problems
involved in estimate by anthropology. Consider the case of the
crater
recently recognized in Italy, which Steel has reported on to
Conference
participants. Improving the reliability of the radio-carbon
dating of this
impact would require sending another team to the area to recover
more
samples, and then radio-carbon dating the samples themselves, all
at
considerable cost.
As for text records of this event, if anyone here recalls my
survey of this
period, there was a passing mention made there of text records
which may
have bearing on it: "The Andersons refer the reader to
Notker Balbalus's
identification of the city involved as Cita Nuova in Istria via a
citation
to Gertrud Bruning, Adamnans Vita Columbae und ihre Abteilung,
Zeitschrift
fur Celtische Philologie volume XI, Halle, 1917, page 290.
By the
Andersons' use of this device, one might assume that this lead
would be a
dead end, but that would depend on whether Istria was within the
borders of
Italy between 563-597 CE. Also, the possibility exists of an
impact by a
separate fragment of a common parent body, an impact which
Balbalus may have
noted."
Recovering these possible text records would require first
locating
Bruning's article, and then Balbalus's identification, and then a
close
examination down to the manuscripts level of the texts underlying
both.
Because of the rarity of all of these texts, this work would
require
extensive travel, which there is no money to pay for; and of
course the
chances of a skilled classicist actually receiving a salary to
carry out any
of this work are essentially nil.
I suppose one could also consider as a part of this method of
risk
estimation some of the work being done on ice cores and tree
rings, where
experts have tried to find historical texts which might explain
the data
which they have recovered in their samples. Here there is very
good news, as
new ice cores have been recovered, and work on their analysis is
proceeding
right along. In particular, these ice cores may throw additional
light on
the events ca. 536 CE. Tree ring data is also being further
developed, and
work continues on improving its accuracy.
A summary of some of the work being done in the recovery of small
and medium
impacts by anthropological techniques may be found at:
http://abob.libs.uga.edu/bobk/ccc/ce091702.html
It is interesting to note that nearly every researcher who is
involved in
researching historical impact events is fairly alarmed by the
results coming
in. One explanation for this alarm may be the rather straight
forward one
which Rob Britt called to our attention, which is that impact
events are not
theoretical for these researchers. Another explanation for their
alarm may
be that the observed recent small and medium impact rates appear
to be much
higher than those predicted by the other risk estimation means
outlined
above. While a part of this divergence in risk estimates may be
due to the
recent encounter of the Earth with the Comet Encke, it is by no
means
certain that the planet Earth is not simply entering into a
period of
increased cometary activity.
This anthropological work is often rightly described as being
based on half
preserved records in half understood languages. Unfortunately, as
in so many
other areas of NEO research, funding here for improvement is
essentially
non-existent, and there is currently little hope of funding for
field teams
to confirm or deny the readings of the historical texts. By way
of example,
to my knowledge no geological teams have ever investigated the
well attested
impacts which occurred in the last century at Rio Curacao in the
jungle of
Brazil and in the Rupununi region of British Guyana. Given this
state of
affairs, there is little chance of funding for dedicated teams to
investigate either the reported destruction of the Bazas area of
France in
580 CE, or the apparent destruction by impact ca. 800 CE of Key
Marco,
Florida.
A COMPARISON OF THE COST EFFECTIVENESS OF THE DIFFERING
TECHNIQUES FOR
ESTIMATING THE RISK OF SMALL AND MEDIUM IMPACTS
While the anthropological effects of small and medium impacts are
of the
greatest personal interest to me, and while I have no hard
absolute dollar
numbers to use as a basis for comparison, my first seat of the
pants guess
is that the most cost effective way for getting firm estimates of
the risks
arising from small and medium asteroid and comet impacts is going
to be by
counting the craters seen in the new imagery being returned from
Mars by the
Global Surveyor and Observor spacecraft. In comparison with any
of the other
methods of small and medium impact risk estimation which were
described
above, the method of crater counting appears to have the dual
advantages of
being relatively cheap, as well as being incredibly accurate.
Speaking for myself, and in this I am unanimous, to quote Mrs.
Rumboldt,
while we are awaiting those new crater counts, I will object to
any attempts
made by anyone to present their risk "estimates" as
being "facts", instead
of clearly identifying those "estimates" as being
estimates, whatever the
method of estimation they have used to derive them. At the same
time, I will
also most certainly object to any attempt made by anyone to use
the results
of any one particular estimation technique to stifle work along
any of the
other line of risk estimation set out above.
THE EFFECTIVNESS OF MITIGATION TECHNIQUES AGAINST SMALL AND
MEDIUM IMPACT
In discussions of mitigation techniques there is usually a focus
on
mitigating larger impactors, and there is seldom any mention made
of the
efficiency of these mitigation techniques against small to medium
impactors.
It can reasonably be asserted that simply taking shelter could
provide some
protection against the smallest impactors, and that coastal
evacuation could
provide a great deal of protection against impact mega-tsunami.
Taking
shelter would require at least 45 minutes of warning as to the
exact
location where the impact would occur; evacuating a coastal area
would take
at least 2 to 3 days.
My guess is that both of these will require telescopes of far
greater
capabilities than those currently being proposed. The
construction of such
telescopes may have the additional benefit of being able prevent
small to
medium impacts from triggering an accidental nuclear weapons
exchange.
Perhaps the MSX space based system which Pete Worden has been
advocating may
provide sufficient warning time, but so far I see no funding is
sight for
it.
Skilled engineers in Russia: http://abob.libs.uga.edu/bobk/ccc/cc020701.html
have detailed programs for either ameliorating or preventing
impacts by the
use of nuclear charges. While the restraints on this method of
mitigation
are currently being rigourously examined by many teams, including
that of Dr
Holsapple at the University of Washington, at this point in time
there is no
breakdown of the efficiency by impactor types (metal, stoney
metal, stoney,
carbonaceous chondrite) of differing diameters (100, 200, 300,
400 meters).
In other words, we currently do not have even a rough idea as to
the
effectiveness of using nuclear charges against small to medium
impactors.
In the debate, I was delighted to see those who have concerns
about the
safety of having nuclear charges on hand to deal with potential
impactors
state those concerns explicitly. While hundred megaton charges of
the type
needed to deal with impactors are of limited military use, here
again, as in
so many other areas, no funds are being spent on diplomatic
efforts to
develop ways to ensure that any such charges will be stored
safely, and not
diverted to terrorist or military use.
In the US, Dr. Mazanek's team at NASA's Langley Research Center
has
developed a plan for mitigation by laser ablation, a technique
which should
be effective against potential impactors of all classes and
sizes:
http://rasc.larc.nasa.gov/rasc_new/CAPS/CAPS_Concept_Summary.pdf
and
http://www.space.com/businesstechnology/technology/lunar_caps_011212-1.html
Given all of this work, there is simply no excuse for anyone in
the NEO
community to continue to propagate the fatalistic falsehood that
nothing can
be done to prevent any impacts, even given the severe restraints
which
Holsapple and others are exploring. Thus in closing this quick
overview of
the techniques for estimating the risks arising from the impacts
of small to
medium asteroid and comets, I have a small favor to ask of some
of you
concerning techniques for impact mitigation.
I would very much appreciate it if certain members of the NEO
community
would stop repeating the falsehood that there is nothing we can
do to
prevent impact events, whether they are small (city killers),
medium (nation
killers), or large (dinosaur killers). Having examined in some
depth the
work being done here, my conclusion is that at this point in time
such
statements of futility amount to very nearly little more than
lying to the
public about the methods available for dealing with a threat
which is of
concern to them.
Well, Benny, that's it. As always, I remain...
Yours in Science,
Ed
==============
(10) AND FINALLY: THE END MIGHT BE NIGH IN 20 BILLION YEARS
>From Space.com, 6 March 2003
http://www.space.com/scienceastronomy/big_rip_030306.html
The Big Rip: New Theory Ends Universe by Shredding Everything
By Robert Roy Britt
A rather harrowing new theory about the death of the universe
paints a
picture of "phantom energy" ripping apart galaxies,
stars, planets and
eventually every speck of matter in a fantastical end to time.
Scientifically it is just about the most repulsive notion ever
conceived.
The speculative but serious cosmology is described as a
"pretty fantastic
possibility" even by its lead author, Robert Caldwell of
Dartmouth
University. It explains one possible outcome for solid
astronomical
observations made in the late 1990s -- that the universe is
expanding at an
ever-increasing pace, and that something unknown is vacuuming
everything
outward.
The question Caldwell and his colleagues posed is, what would
happen if the
rate of acceleration increased?
Their answer is that the eventual, phenomenal pace would
overwhelm the
normal, trusted effects of gravity right down to the local level.
Even the
nuclear forces that bind things in the subatomic world will cease
to be
effective.
"The expansion becomes so fast that it literally rips apart
all bound
objects," Caldwell explained in a telephone interview.
"It rips apart
clusters of galaxies. It rips apart stars. It rips apart planets
and solar
systems. And it eventually rips apart all matter."
He calls it, as you might guess, the Big Rip.
The standard view
Driving the known acceleration of the universe's expansion is a
mysterious
thing is called dark energy, thought of by scientists as
anti-gravity
working over large distances.
Conventional wisdom holds that the acceleration will proceed at a
constant
rate, akin to a car that moves 10 mph faster with each mile
traveled. With
nothing to cap the acceleration, all galaxies will eventually
recede from
one another at the speed of light, leaving each galaxy alone in a
cold, dark
universe within 100 billion years. We would not be able to see
any galaxies
outside our Milky Way, even with the most powerful telescopes.
That's the conventional view, remarkable as it sounds.
The Big Rip theory has dark energy's prowess increasing with
time, until
it's an out-of-control phantom energy. Think of our car
accelerating an
additional 10 mph every half mile, then every hundred yards, then
every
foot.
Before long, the bumpers are bound to fly off. Sooner or later,
our
hypothetical engine will come apart, regardless of how much we
spend on
motor oil.
Countdown to demise
Other theorists who have reviewed the Big Rip theory are not yet
sold on the
idea. Meanwhile, Caldwell's team has provided a precise countdown
to total
demise. The projected end is, reassuringly, 20 billion years
away. If our
species survives the next 19 billion years (and there are serious
doubts
about this, given our Sun's projected fate) here are some signs
that
scientists of the future will want to look for.
A billion years before the end, all galaxies will have receded so
far and so
fast from our own as to be erased from the sky, as in no longer
visible.
When the Milky Way begins to fly apart, there are 60 million
years left.
Planets in our solar system will start to wing away from the Sun
three
months before the end of time.
When Earth explodes, the end is momentarily near.
At this point, there is still a short interval before atoms and
even their
nuclei break apart. "There's about 30 minutes left,"
Caldwell said, "But
it's not quality time."
And then what? Does the universe recycle itself? Is there
something after
nothing?
"We're not sure what happens after that," Caldwell
says. "On the face of it,
it would look like time ends."
The first explosion
Caldwell's study had humble beginnings. He and his colleagues,
Marc
Kamionkowski and Nevin Weinberg at Caltech, were considering how
a sphere of
matter collapses under its own weight to form a galaxy. In
computer models,
they tweaked with the dark energy factor and found that too much
of it would
actually prevent the sphere from collapsing. In extreme cases,
the sphere
exploded.
"That was our hint that there was something really unusual
going on,"
Caldwell said.
It wasn't long ago, just before the accelerated expansion was
discovered,
that many cosmologists believed the universe might reverse
course, that
normal gravity would win, and that everything would fall back in
a Big
Crunch. More recently, solid observational data has all but
assured the
infinite-expansion model and the cold, dark, never-ending end.
The Caldwell group decided there might be a third possibility,
leading to
their new paper, which has been submitted to the Physical Review.
But there are many unknowns. It is not clear if the dark energy
driving
expansion is a force not currently described by physics, or if it
is merely
a different manifestation of gravity over huge distances. The
repulsion
could be a response to dark matter, unseen stuff that is known to
comprise
23 percent of the universe, based on firm observations.
Dark matter has unknown properties, and it may be related to dark
energy,
Caldwell said. He notes that even Einstein considered that
gravity might
work repulsively, in a manner consistent with his theory of
general
relativity.
Dark energy, being quantified only recently, tends to be
discussed as some
strange new force, in addition to the four fundamental forces:
gravity,
electromagnetism, and the strong and weak nuclear forces that
govern atoms.
But the repulsion is possibly just the way gravity behaves in the
presence
of dark energy, Caldwell said. In that sense, it is not a new
force.
Cautious reception
To turn dark energy into destructive phantom energy, Caldwell and
his
colleagues had to play around with a thing called the
cosmological constant,
a mathematical fix that Einstein applied to general relativity.
Einstein
later called it his greatest mistake, when Edwin Hubble found in
the 1920s
that the universe was expanding (seven decades later, that
expansion would
be seen accelerating).
The cosmological constant has been recently revived. Attempts to
describe
dark energy differ in how the density of dark energy varies with
time. In
some models, the density decreases slowly. For the cosmological
constant,
the density is a constant. For phantom energy, it must grow with
time.
"We considered a more exotic form of dark energy which was
more repulsive,"
as Caldwell explains is.
Abraham Loeb, a theoretician at the Harvard-Smithsonian Center
for
Astrophysics, has quantified the lonely effects of a
forever-expanding
universe. Loeb stands by that scenario, but he said Caldwell's
idea is
nonetheless interesting to explore.
"I think it's a logical possibility," Loeb told
SPACE.com. But he cautioned
that altering the cosmological constant goes against current
consensus.
"If I had to place a bet, I would bet in favor of the
standard cosmological
constant," Loeb said.
Sci-fi to reality
If Caldwell's team is right, cosmology would undergo a
revolution. Sci-fi
ideas like wormholes and time travel might suddenly enter the
realm of hard
science. All of this could sort itself out pretty soon, Caldwell
believes.
Observations over the next few years may actually show whether
his phantom
energy is possible.
"Who knows if it is right or wrong," Caldwell said of
his theory. "I think
we'll find out pretty soon."
In fact, recent observations from NASA's WMAP space probe have
pinned down
the physics of the universe with surprising accuracy. A little
wiggle room
remains for the cosmological constant. Yet more WMAP data are
expected over
the next four years. Other missions, including one called the
Supernova
Acceleration Probe (SNAP), could provide answers, Caldwell said.
Even if the Big Rip is a big bust, there's no guarantee of a
pleasant
ending.
Alternate final chapter
Paul Steinhardt, a Princeton University physicist, is, like
Caldwell and
Loeb, no stranger to strange ideas. Steinhardt advocates a
cyclical
universe, one that has no beginning or end but which instead is
constantly
starting over again.
Steinhardt theorizes within the generally accepted standards of
the
cosmological constant. He said the Big Rip is more exotic than
most ideas
but still conceivable, a projected possible result that is
"straightforward
and obvious for cosmologists."
Yet there is another entirely different possibility for the final
moments of
time as we know it.
In a theory put forth two years ago by Steinhardt and his
colleagues, our
universe is but a membrane, or brane, floating in a
five-dimensional space.
It is destined to collide dramatically with another brane. The
idea, labeled
the Ekpyrotic Universe, would replace portions of the Big Bang
scenario
while sticking to the presently accepted estimates of
acceleration.
"Lest you get too optimistic, galaxies are destroyed in a
far more violent
way," Steinhardt said of the brane scenario. "They are
vaporized at the next
'bang' -- the collision between branes ... so, you either rip
them apart or
you vaporize them."
Copyright 2003, Space.com
--------------------------------------------------------------------
CCNet is a scholarly electronic network. To
subscribe/unsubscribe, please
contact the moderator Benny J Peiser < b.j.peiser@livjm.ac.uk
>. Information
circulated on this network is for scholarly and educational use
only. The
attached information may not be copied or reproduced for
any other purposes without prior permission of the copyright
holders. The
fully indexed archive of the CCNet, from February 1997 on, can be
found at
http://abob.libs.uga.edu/bobk/cccmenu.html.
DISCLAIMER: The opinions,
beliefs and viewpoints expressed in the articles and texts and in
other
CCNet contributions do not necessarily reflect the opinions,
beliefs and
viewpoints of the moderator of this network.
--------------------------------------------------------------------
*
CCNet, 25/2003 - 7 March 2003
------------------------------
"Dust dumped over New Zealand by the central American impact
said to
have killed the dinosaurs [amounts] to not much more than what
you
would find in your house if you didn't clean for a weekend or
two. The
[meteor] impact theory is largely driven by American
imagination."
--Gordon Lister, Monash University, 5 March 2003
"What isn't settled is just what was going on 3.2 billion
years ago
to cause three great impacts in just 20 million years. Were
asteroid
impacts more common throughout the early history of the Earth or
was
this just a spike of impacts?"
--Larry O'Hanlon, Discovery News, 4 March 2003
(1) HUGE ASTEROID IMPACTS PREDATE DINOS
Discovery Channel, 4 March 2003
(2) THE OLDEST RECORD OF EARLY ARCHAEAN IMPACTS
Geology: Vol. 31, No. 3, pp. 283-286
(3) NASA RELEASES IMAGE OF CHICXULUB CRATER CREATED BY MASSIVE
SPACE ROCK
Knight Ridder Newspapers, 6 March 2003
(4) SHADED RELIEF IMAGE OF MEXICO'S YUCATAN PENINSULA
Planetary Photojournal, 6 March 2003
(5) IMPACT WORKSHOP
Charles Cockell <csco@bas.ac.uk>
(6) AUSTRALASIAN MICROTEKTITES IN THE SOUTH CHINA SEA:
IMPLICATIONS
REGARDING THE LOCATION AND
SIZE OF THE SOURCE CRATER.
B.P. Glass
(7) NUMERICAL MODELING OF MARINE IMPACTS
J Ormo et al.
(8) THE SUDBURY STRUCTURE: A CIRCULAR IMPACT CRATER?
WA Morris
(9) AND FINALLY: NUTTY PROFESSOR: "K/T IMPACT THEORY LARGELY
DRIVEN BY
AMERICAN IMAGINATION"
Sydney Morning Herald, 5 March 2003
==========
(1) HUGE ASTEROID IMPACTS PREDATE DINOS
>From Discovery Channel, 4 March 2003
http://c.moreover.com/click/here.pl?e62993760&e=6513
By Larry O'Hanlon, Discovery News
March 4, 2003 - The three most terrible asteroid impacts in the
Earth's
history are also the oldest, say geologists working on frozen
blobs of
melted rock ejected from impacts more than 3.2 billion years ago.
Any craters from the impacts were erased long ago by Earth's
everchanging
crust. What does remain, however, are deposits of rock spherules
in South
Africa's Barberton Greenstone Belt region that were once a fiery
rain of
molten material blasted from horrific impacts.
"The bottom line is that I think they were bigger than the
K/T impact," said
geologist Frank Kyte of the University of California at Los
Angeles,
referring to the impact of a ten-kilometer (seven-mile) wide
asteroid that
killed the dinosaurs 65 million years ago.
Kyte and a number of other asteroid impact researchers published
their
report in the March issue of the journal Geology.
Since they were discovered in 1986, the South African spherules
have sparked
scientific debate over whether they were caused by impacts or
some purely
earthbound process. The work by Kyte and his colleagues might
finally settle
the debate because they have found in the spherules something
only found in
extraterrestrial rocks - an unusual abundance of a rare type of
chromium.
For reasons that are buried in the early history of the solar
system,
meteorites tend to have more chromium-53 and chromium-54 than
rocks from the
Earth, moon or Mars, which tend to have more chromium-52 (Martian
meteorites
supplied the information about Mars).
Using a new and painstaking technique to analyze the South
African
spherules, Kyte and his colleagues were able to determine that
the rocks
contained amounts of chromium-53 and chromium-54 that pegged them
as
relatives of a relatively rare kind of meteorite, a carbonaceous
chondrite.
Factors they used to estimate the size of the asteroids that
spawned the
spherules include the thickness of the spherule beds and the
likely
assumption that the debris rained down over the entire Earth. All
that seems
to indicate that the Archean asteroids ranged from one to seven
times the
size of the K/T asteroid.
In other words, the discovery not only confirms the impact
origins of the
rocks, but it suggests that the asteroids 3.2 billion years ago
were a bit
different than those that are common today, said planetary
scientist Alan
Hildebrand of the University of Calgary.
They are rough estimates, based on comparisons to similar beds
from the much
better preserved K-T impact. Factors they used to estimate the
size of the
asteroids include the thickness of the spherule beds and the
likely
assumption that the debris rained down over the entire Earth. All
that seems
to indicate that the Archean asteroids ranged from one to seven
times the
size of the KT asteroid.
"In my opinion this is quite a significant result,"
said Hildebrand. "It
should settle the debate on origins."
What isn't settled is just what was going on 3.2 billion years
ago to cause
three great impacts in just 20 million years. Were asteroid
impacts more
common throughout the early history of the Earth or was this just
a spike of
impacts?
Only the discovery of more such spherules of other ages will
tell, said
Kyte.
Copyright © 2003 Discovery Communications Inc.
===========
(2) THE OLDEST RECORD OF EARLY ARCHAEAN IMPACTS
>From Geology: Vol. 31, No. 3, pp. 283-286
http://www.gsajournals.org/gsaonline/?request=get-document&issn=0091-7613&volume=031&issue=03&page=0283
Early Archean spherule beds: Chromium isotopes confirm origin
through
multiple impacts of projectiles of carbonaceous chondrite type
Frank T. Kyte
Center for Astrobiology, Institute of Geophysics and Planetary
Physics,
University of California, Los Angeles, California 90095-1567, USA
Alex Shukolyukov
Scripps Institution of Oceanography, University of California,
San Diego, La
Jolla, California 92093-0212, USA
Günter W. Lugmair
Scripps Institution of Oceanography, University of California,
San Diego, La
Jolla, California 92093-0212, USA, and Max-Planck Institute for
Chemistry,
Cosmochemistry, P.O. 3060, 55020 Mainz, Germany
Donald R. Lowe
Department of Geological and Environmental Sciences, Stanford
University,
Stanford, California 94305, USA
Gary R. Byerly
Department of Geology and Geophysics, Louisiana State University,
Baton
Rouge, Louisiana 70803-4101, USA
Manuscript Received by the Society 23 May 2002
Revised Manuscript Received 22 October 2002
Manuscript Accepted 23 October 2002
ABSTRACT
Three Early Archean spherule beds from Barberton, South Africa,
have
anomalous Cr isotope compositions in addition to large Ir
anomalies,
confirming the presence of meteoritic material with a composition
similar to
that in carbonaceous chondrites. The extraterrestrial components
in beds S2,
S3, and S4 are estimated to be 1%, 50%-60%, and 15%-30%,
respectively. These
beds are probably the distal, and possibly global, ejecta from
major
large-body impacts. These impacts were probably much larger than
the
Cretaceous-Tertiary event, and all occurred over an interval of
20 m.y.,
implying an impactor flux at 3.2 Ga that was more than an order
of magnitude
greater than the present flux.
Keywords: Archean, impacts, spherules, iridium, 5352.
INTRODUCTION
The oldest record of major impact events on Earth may be a number
of Early
Archean (3.5-3.2 Ga) spherule beds in the Barberton greenstone
belt, South
Africa. Lowe and Byerly (1986) first proposed that single
spherule beds
found in the Barberton greenstone belt, and in the Eastern
Pilbara block,
Western Australia, were derived from quenched silicate droplets
formed by
major impact events. Other workers (de Wit, 1986 ; French, 1987 ;
Buick,
1987 ) argued that an impact origin was unlikely and proposed
that the
spherules could be from erosion of volcanic materials. Further
work by Lowe
et al. (1989) found that at least four spherule beds (labeled
S1-S4) occur
in the Barberton greenstone belt and that some specimens are
enriched in Ir
and other platinum group elements (PGEs). They cited seven
specific criteria
that distinguish these beds from normal clastic sediments,
including the
wide geographic distribution of two beds across a variety of
depositional
environments, presence of relict quench textures and Ni-rich
spinels within
the spherules, absence of juvenile volcaniclastic debris, and
extreme
enrichment of Ir and other PGEs. Kyte et al. (1992) reported
detailed
analyses of four PGEs (Ir, Os, Pt, Pd) and Au in bed S4 and found
Os/Ir and
Pt/Ir ratios within 20% of chondritic abundances. Although Pd and
Au in S4
were depleted relative to chondrites by 59% and 98%,
respectively, this is
opposite to the effect expected by Au mineralization and was
attributed to
regional hydrothermal alteration of originally chondritic
material. Byerly
and Lowe (1994) showed that chemical compositions of Ni-rich
spinels in
spherules are unique and distinct from those in komatiites and
other
volcanic rocks. These spinels are now recognized to occur only in
spherules
from bed S3 (Lowe et al., 2003 ). Some researchers, however,
still argued
for a terrestrial origin, possibly related to volcanism and gold
mineralization (Koeberl and Reimold, 1995 ; Reimold et al., 2000
). They
analyzed samples from the vicinity of gold mines in the northern
Barberton
greenstone belt and found extreme enrichments of Ir, a result
they found
difficult to reconcile with an impact origin.
Work on the 53Mn-53Cr isotope systematics in various solar system
objects
(Lugmair and Shukolyukov, 1998 ) has provided a method for
unequivocally
demonstrating an extraterrestrial component in impact ejecta with
high
concentrations of meteoritic Cr. All meteorite classes studied so
far have
excess 53Cr relative to terrestrial samples. This fact reflects
an early
Mn/Cr fractionation and possibly heterogeneous distribution of
the
now-extinct parent radionuclide 53Mn (half-life, t1/2 = 3.7 m.y.)
in the
early solar system. The carbonaceous chondrites also have an
excess of 54Cr,
due to a presolar component, in addition to excess 53Cr
(Shukolyukov and
Lugmair, 2000 , 2001 ). Thus, precise measurements of Cr isotope
abundances
can distinguish terrestrial from extraterrestrial materials and
the
carbonaceous chondrites from other meteorite groups. This method
provided
the first isotopic proof that the Cretaceous-Tertiary (K-T)
boundary
contains meteoritic materials (Shukolyukov and Lugmair, 1998 ).
We have
applied this method to several spherule bed samples. In our
initial study
(Shukolyukov et al., 2000 ) we found anomalous Cr isotope
abundances in bed
S4. We now report that three spherule beds-S2, S3, and S4-are all
enriched
in extraterrestrial Cr.
FULL PAPER at
http://www.gsajournals.org/gsaonline/?request=get-document&issn=0091-7613&volume=031&issue=03&page=0283
=============
(3) NASA RELEASES IMAGE OF CHICXULUB CRATER CREATED BY MASSIVE
SPACE ROCK
>From Knight Ridder Newspapers, 6 March 2003
http://www.siliconvalley.com/mld/siliconvalley/news/5332512.htm
By Robert S. Boyd
Knight Ridder Newspapers
WASHINGTON - A NASA space shuttle has taken the first aerial
picture of the
crater left by the monster comet or asteroid that most scientists
believe
doomed the dinosaurs to extinction 65 million years ago.
The image shows part of the outer rim of the 112-mile-wide
Chicxulub
(pronounced CHICK-soo-lube) crater on the northwest corner of
Mexico's
Yucatan Peninsula. It's a semicircular trough, 10 to 15 feet deep
and 3
miles wide, the surface evidence of what was once a
3,000-foot-deep gouge in
the Earth.
"If you walked across it, you probably wouldn't notice it.
That's where the
view from space becomes invaluable," said Michael Kobrick,
project manager
for NASA's Shuttle Radar Topography Mission.
For 10 days in February 2000, the shuttle Endeavor used a radar
instrument
to trace the ups and downs on 80 percent of the Earth's landmass.
It brought
back 200 billion detailed, 3-D measurements, which have since
been analyzed
and turned into a high-resolution map of North America that NASA
released on
Thursday.
"There are spectacular features that pop out in these maps
as never before,
and more subtle features, like Chicxulub, become apparent for the
first
time," Kobrick said.
In the 1980s, scientists began to suspect that a huge space rock
had smashed
into what is now the Caribbean Sea. By the 1990s, most were
convinced that
this was the "smoking gun" responsible for the
extinction of the dinosaurs
and 70 percent of the species then living on Earth.
Exactly what caused the mass extinction is not known. Likely
explanations
include huge dust clouds that blocked the sun and crippled plant
growth for
years; sulphur clouds that fell as worldwide acid rain and global
firestorms
ignited by the red-hot debris kicked up by the collision.
It must have been "one of the Earth's worst days," said
Alan Buis, spokesman
for NASA's Jet Propulsion Laboratory in Pasadena, Calif., which
manages the
project.
---
For more information:
NASA images are available at
http://photojournal.jpl.nasa.gov/catalog/PIA03379
============
(4) SHADED RELIEF IMAGE OF MEXICO'S YUCATAN PENINSULA
>From Planetary Photojournal, 6 March 2003
http://photojournal.jpl.nasa.gov/catalog/PIA03379
PIA03379: Shaded Relief with Height as Color, Yucatan Peninsula,
Mexico
Target Name: Earth
Is a satellite of: Sol (our sun)
Mission: Shuttle Radar Topography Mission (SRTM)
Spacecraft: Space Shuttle
Instrument: C-Band Interferometric Radar
Product Size: 18001 samples x 11438 lines
Produced By: JPL
Full-Res TIFF: PIA03379.tif (617.7 megabytes)
Original Caption Released with Image:
This shaded relief image of Mexico's Yucatan Peninsula show a
subtle, but
unmistakable, indication of the Chicxulub impact crater. Most
scientists now
agree that this impact was the cause of the Cretatious-Tertiary
Extinction,
the event 65 million years ago that marked the sudden extinction
of the
dinosaurs as well as the majority of life then on Earth.
Most of the peninsula is visible here, along with the island of
Cozumel off
the east coast. The Yucatan is a plateau composed mostly of
limestone and is
an area of very low relief with elevations varying by less than a
few
hundred meters (about 500 feet.) In this computer-enhanced image
the
topography has been greatly exaggerated to highlight a
semicircular trough,
the darker green arcing line at the upper left corner of the
peninsula. This
trough is only about 3 to 5 meters (10 to 15 feet) deep and is
about 5 km.
wide (3 miles), so subtle that if you walked across it you
probably would
not notice it, and is a surface expression of the crater's outer
boundary.
Scientists believe the impact, which was centered just off the
coast in the
Caribbean, altered the subsurface rocks such that the overlying
limestone
sediments, which formed later and erode very easily, would
preferentially
erode on the vicinity of the crater rim. This formed the trough
as well as
numerous sinkholes (called cenotes) which are visible as small
circular
depressions.
Two visualization methods were combined to produce the image:
shading and
color coding of topographic height. The shade image was derived
by computing
topographic slope in the northwest-southeast direction, so that
northwestern
slopes appear bright and southeastern slopes appear dark. Color
coding is
directly related to topographic height, with green at the lower
elevations,
rising through yellow and tan, to white at the highest
elevations.
For a smaller, annotated version of this image, please select
Figure 1,
below:
Elevation data used in this image were acquired by the Shuttle
Radar
Topography Mission (SRTM) aboard the Space Shuttle Endeavour,
launched on
Feb. 11, 2000. SRTM used the same radar instrument that comprised
the
Spaceborne Imaging Radar-C/X-Band Synthetic Aperture Radar
(SIR-C/X-SAR)
that flew twice on the Space Shuttle Endeavour in 1994. SRTM was
designed to
collect 3-D measurements of the Earth's surface. To collect the
3-D data,
engineers added a 60-meter (approximately 200-foot) mast,
installed
additional C-band and X-band antennas, and improved tracking and
navigation
devices. The mission is a cooperative project between NASA, the
National
Imagery and Mapping Agency (NIMA) of the U.S. Department of
Defense and the
German and Italian space agencies. It is managed by NASA's Jet
Propulsion
Laboratory, Pasadena, Calif., for NASA's Earth Science
Enterprise,
Washington, D.C.
Size: 261 by 162 kilometers (162 by 100 miles)
Location: 20.8 degrees North latitude, 89.3 degrees West
longitude
Orientation: North toward the top, Mercator projection
Image Data: shaded and colored SRTM elevation model
Original Data Resolution: SRTM 1 arcsecond (about 30 meters or 98
feet)
Date Acquired: February 2000
================
(5) IMPACT WORKSHOP
>From Charles Cockell <csco@bas.ac.uk>
Dear Friends,
There are just two days left for late registration for the 10th
ESF
Workshop. The workshop, which will be held at King's College,
Cambridge from
Sunday March 30th to Tuesday April 1 includes the following
highlights :
- Two and a half days of talks on BIOLOGICAL PROCESSES ASSOCIATED
WITH
IMPACT EVENTS. Abstracts will cover a diversity of interesting
connections
on the general theme of impact cratering as a biological process.
As well as
discussions of extinctions talks will cover survival of microbes
during
impact, duration of hydrothermal oases on Titan, organic
synthesis in impact
events and others.
- a Gala dinner at King's College with an IMPACT theme
- an open discussion opportunity to air your views and discuss
ideas for
future IMPACT funding (remember this is the last workshop of the
current
funding cycle. Now is your chance to demonsrate support by
attending this
meeting and forging the path of this program). It is IMPORTANT
that those
who support IMPACT attend this workshop!
- Reception at the University of Cambridge Sedgwick Museum
Please pass this e-mail to others who may be interested in
attending this
event.
Information at : http://pssri.open.ac.uk/ESF/
________________________
Dr. Charles Cockell,
British Antarctic Survey,
High Cross,
Madingley Road,
Cambridge.
CB3 0ET. UK
Tel : + 44 1223 221560
e-mail : csco@bas.ac.uk
=========
(6) AUSTRALASIAN MICROTEKTITES IN THE SOUTH CHINA SEA:
IMPLICATIONS
REGARDING THE LOCATION AND SIZE OF THE SOURCE CRATER. B. P.
Glass, Geology
Department, University of Delaware, Newark, DE 19716, USA
http://www.lpi.usra.edu/meetings/lpsc2003/pdf/1092.pdf
Introduction: Australasian microtektites have been found in over
50 sites in
the Indian and western equatorial Pacific Oceans; the Philippine,
Sulu, and
Celebes Seas; and more recently in the South China Sea [1-5].
Glass and
Pizzuto [2] used geographic variations in concentrations of
microtektites
(number >125 µm dia./cm2) to predict the location of the
source crater. The
location that explained the geographic distribution the best was
12E N, 106E
E. This location was supported by Lee and Wei [5] based on data
from two
additional cores. Previous estimates of the source crater
diameter range
from 17 to 114 km [2,5,6].
I report here additional microtektite/impact ejecta data for Core
17957-2
taken in the South China Sea (10E 53.9' N, 115E 18.3' E) during
the SONNE-95
cruise [3]. I also report the discovery of abundant Australasian
microtektites and associated shockmetamorphosed grains in Ocean
Drilling
Program (ODP) Hole 1144A, in the northern South China Sea (20E
3.18' N, 117E
25.14' E). ODP Site 1143 (9E 21.72' N, 113E 17.11' E) was also
searched for
microtektites, but the layer was not found at this site. The new
data from
Core 17957-2 and Hole 1144A, as well as from other Australasian
microtektitebearing sites, were used to reevaluate the location
and size of
the source crater.
Core 17957-2: Nearly 3000 microtektites (>125 µm dia.) were
recovered from
Core 17957-2. About
90% of the microtektites were found between 798 and 818 cm depth
(i.e., a 20
cm interval), although scattered microtektites were found over a
2.25 m
interval. The peak abundance is at a depth of about 806 cm. Close
to 55% of
the microtektites are splash forms (spheroids, teardrops,
dumbbells, disks),
the remainder are fragments. The largest spheroid is ~880 µm in
diameter.
The largest elongate form is 1.4 mm long and the largest fragment
has a
maximum length of ~2.1 mm. Many of the fragments are larger than
the largest
spheroid and exhibit no obvious original outer surface and, thus,
may be
tektite fragments. Unmelted impact ejecta make up about 20% of
the ejecta in
the microtektite layer. The most obvious unmelted ejecta are
white opaque
grains consisting of mixtures of quartz, coesite, and traces of
stishovite
(and probably lechatelierite). Numerous shocked-rock fragments
are also
present and X-ray diffraction (XRD) studies indicate that they
generally
consist of coesite, quartz, stishovite(?), and a clay/mica phase.
The
maximum length of the largest shocked-rock fragment is ~1 mm. I
estimate
that the number of microtektites and unmelted ejecta (>125
µm) per cm2 at
this site is 2918 and 814, respectively.
ODP Hole 1144A. The microtektite layer at this site was found in
Core 37x,
Section 6. More than 90% of the microtektites were found between
61 and 71 cm with the peak
abundance at ~68 cm depth (~345.68 m below the sea floor).
Scattered microtektites were found over a
1.46 m interval. The total number of recovered microtektites was
18,189.
About 75% are fragments, the remainder is splash forms. A small
percent of
the glass is highly vesicular with a frothy appearance. In
addition, a few,
dark, translucent to opaque, heterogeneous blebs of normal impact
glass were
recovered. Unmelted ejecta make up 44% of the total impact
ejecta. Roughly
20% (by number) of the unmelted ejecta are white opaque grains,
which
according to XRD studies, contain various proportions of quartz,
coesite,
and stishovite (and presumably lechatelierite).
One appears to be pure stishovite. Most of the rock fragments are
light- to
dark-grey, equant, subangular to subrounded, and fined-grained
(generally
<20 µm). XRD studies indicate that the rock fragments are
mixtures of
quartz, coesite, and a mica/clay phase. At this site, the
estimated number
of microtektites (>125 µm)/cm2 is 9834 and the estimated
number of unmelted
ejecta grains (>125 µm)/cm2 is 7327. At the peak abundance
level, impact
ejecta (including microtektites) make up >90 wt.% of the
coarse (>125 µm)
fraction. Thus, Hole 1144A has the highest concentration of
microtektites
(>3 time higher), the highest percent of fragments versus
whole
microtektites, and the highest ratio of unmelted to melted ejecta
of any
previously studied Australasian microtektite-bearing site. All of
this
suggests that this site is closer to the source crater than any
other site.
Predicted Source Crater Site and Size: The source area can be
predicted by
assuming locations of hypothetical source craters and then
regressing the concentrations of
microtektites at each core site versus the distance from the
postulated
crater [2]. The location that gives the highest correlation
coefficient (r2
value) indicates the location that explains the geographical
variation in
microtektite concentrations the best. Using the microtektite
concentrations
for Core 17957-2 and ODP Hole 1144A given above, as well as data
from Glass
and Pizzuto [2] and Lee and Wei [5], indicate a source crater
location near
15E N and 105E E with an r2 value of 0.86. This is 3E farther
north and 1E
farther west than predicted by Glass and Pizzuto [2] and Lee and
Wei [5],
but it is closer to the location predicted by Schnetzler [7]
based on
geographical variations in composition of Muong Nong-type
Australasian
tektites. However, any place in northern Cambodia, central Laos,
or eastern
Thailand would explain the geographic distribution nearly well.
ODP Hole
1144A is the closest microtektitebearing site to this location
(~1430 km
away) which is consistent with the observations discussed above
that
indicate that this site is closer to the source crater than any
other
Australasian microtektite site.
The size of the source crater can be estimated based on equations
that
relate the thickness of an
ejecta layer to the size of the source crater and distance from
the source
crater (e.g., [8]). The concentrations of microtektites were
first used to
estimate the thickness of the layer, prior to bioturbation, at
each site (an
average microtektite diameter of 200 µm was used in the
calculations). The
maximum thickness obtained was only ~800 µm. Using these
thicknesses in the
equations of [8] indicate a source crater diameter of 33 ± 6 km
(based on
eleven sites with the highest concentrations). If the unmelt ed
ejecta at
Site 1144A are included in the estimate
of the ejecta layer thickness, the estimated size of the source
crater
increases from 39 to 44 km. Unfortunately, concentrations of
unmelted ejecta
at most other sites have not been determined, but appear to be
too low to
make much of a difference. Comparison of microtek tite
concentration versus
distance from the source crater between the Australasian strewn
field and
the Ivory Coast and North American strewn fields with source
craters of 10.5
km and 85 km in diameter, respectively, suggests that the
Australasian
source crater is intermediate in size but probably closer to the
size of the
North American source crater. Thus, a diameter of ~40 km appears
to be a
reasonable estimate based on present knowledge. This is smaller
than most
previous size estimates (e.g., [2,5,6]); however, this smaller
size is more
in line with the apparent lack of any climatological and/or
biological
effects of the impact responsible for the Australasian strewn
field.
Acknowledgments: I thank Kevin M. Yezdimer for help processing
core samples
from ODP 1144A,
the Ocean Drilling Program for core samples, and M. Sarnthein for
samples
from Core 17957-2.
References: [1]Peng H. et al. (1982) JGR, 87, 5563.
[2]Glass B. P. & Pizzuto J. E. (1994) JGR, 99, 19,075.
[3]Zhao Q. et al. (1999) Sci. China Ser. D, 42 (2), 531.
[4]Wang J. et al. (2000) Chinese Sci. Bull. 45 (24), 2277.
[5]Lee M.-Y. & Wei K.-Y. (2000) MAPS, 35, 1151.
[6]Baldwin R. B. (1981) Icarus, 45, 554.
[7]Schnetzler C. C. (1992) Meteoritics, 27, 154.
[8]Stoffler D. (1975) JGR, 80, 4062.
============
(7) NUMERICAL MODELING OF MARINE IMPACTS
Ormo J, Shuvalov VV, Lindstrom M: Numerical modeling for target
water depth
estimation of marine-target impact craters, JOURNAL OF
GEOPHYSICAL
RESEARCH-PLANETS 107 (E12): art. no. 5120 DEC 5 2002
[1] Marine impacts can develop a crater in the seafloor if the
target water
depth is shallow in relation to the size of the impactor. The
geology of
this marine-target crater is influenced by the layer of water in
the upper
part of the target. The influence increases with increased water
depth. The
target water depth is essential when calculating the magnitude of
the impact
event as the seafloor crater merely expresses some of the
expended energy.
The target water depth for a marine-target crater is often
estimated by
facies analysis of sediments related to the impact crater,
unfortunately
often with ambiguous results. We propose to combine the
conventional methods
with numerical modeling of the target water depth based on the
special
target-water-related features of the crater. We used geological
data from
the Lockne crater as constraints in a simulation with the SOVA
hydrocode.
The simulations were done for three different target water depths
(200 m,
500 m, and 1000 m) within the likely depth range for the Middle
Ordovician
sea, in which the impact occurred. In order to obtain the minimum
estimated
size of the Lockne crater by an asteroid impact at 20 km/s, the
water depth
must have been slightly less than 1 km, and the impactor radius
must have
been about 400 m. It was not possible to generate a crater with
the
geological features of Lockne for target water depths of less
than about 500
m. However, the ratio may be further constrained by factors such
as impactor
density, impact angle, and impact velocity.
Addresses:
Ormo J, Inst Nacl Tecn Aerospacial, Ctr Astrobiol CSIC INTA, Ctr
Torrejon
Ajalvir,Km 4, Madrid 28850, Spain
Inst Nacl Tecn Aerospacial, Ctr Astrobiol CSIC INTA, Madrid
28850, Spain
Inst Dynam Geospheres, Moscow 117334, Russia
Stockholm Univ, Dept Geol & Geochem, S-10691 Stockholm,
Sweden
Copyright © 2003 Institute for Scientific Information
=============
(8) THE SUDBURY STRUCTURE: A CIRCULAR IMPACT CRATER?
Morris WA: The Sudbury Structure: A circular impact crater?,
GEOPHYSICAL
RESEARCH LETTERS 29 (20): art. no. 2002 OCT 15 2002
[1] Petrological, geochemical, and structural evidence supports
genesis of
the Sudbury Structure by a meteorite impact. The Sudbury Igneous
Complex
(SIC) represents the ponded melt sheet. The primary morphology
and size of
the Sudbury Crater remains the subject of extensive discussion. A
model is
presented explaining the transformation of an originally circular
crater to
the current elliptical form. Processes involved in the
geometrical
transformation include; a) volume reduction through melt sheet
crystallization, and repeated expulsion of melt into the
surrounding
footwall, b) translation and segmentation on multiple southeast
dipping
thrust surfaces, and c) relative displacement on steep north-
northwest
trending faults. Paleomagnetic, geochemical and structural
evidence supports
the concept of periodic melt expulsions into the footwall.
Seismic,
potential field and paleomagnetic surveys provide evidence in
support of
multiple thrust surfaces. After over 9 km of subsequent erosion
only a small
volumetric portion of the original SIC remains, although complete
vertical
sections through the melt sheet have been preserved. None of the
crater wall
has been preserved. Thus the contacts between the SIC and the
footwall on
the North and South Ranges are interpreted as uplifted crater
floor margins.
Addresses:
Morris WA, McMaster Univ, Sch Geog & Geol, Appl Geophys Grp,
1280 Main st W,
Hamilton, ON L8S 4M1, Canada
McMaster Univ, Sch Geog & Geol, Appl Geophys Grp, Hamilton,
ON L8S 4M1,
Canada
Copyright © 2003 Institute for Scientific Information
===============
(9) AND FINALLY: NUTTY PROFESSOR: "K/T IMPACT THEORY LARGELY
DRIVEN BY
AMERICAN IMAGINATION"
>From Sydney Morning Herald, 5 March 2003
http://www.smh.com.au/text/articles/2003/03/04/1046540189165.htm
By Richard Macey
As if war with Iraq, global terrorism and Australia's soaring
foreign debt
are not enough, here is something else to fret about.
The tectonic plates on which the continents ride could collapse
into the
Earth's interior, with catastrophic results for life, a scientist
said
yesterday.
Gordon Lister, from the Australia Crustal Research Centre at
Monash
University, suspects such slow-motion disasters, not collisions
with
asteroids, are to blame for periodic mass extinctions, including
the loss of
the dinosaurs 65 million years ago.
The drifting of tectonic plates over billions of years has
reshaped the
world. The Himalayas, for example, formed when India collided
with Asia.
But Professor Lister said tectonic plates could also
"founder" and sink into
the "sticky, flowing rock" that makes up the Earth's
interior.
"It's like a ship that's going along and sinks," he
said. Over millions of
years the continents and mountains alongside the plates would
tear to bits,
dramatically changing climatic patterns, inducing droughts and
even
replacing tropical forests with glaciers.
Asked how quickly climate changes could trigger a mass
extinction, he said:
"It could be less than one million years."
New volcanos would erupt and entire continents could be swamped
by lava.
Earthquakes could stir up methane buried under the sea, creating
massive
greenhouse events.
One, 55 billion years ago, released 2000 billion tonnes of
methane in 1000
to 10,000 years.
Professor Lister said surveys of dust deposits created by ancient
meteor
impacts showed they did not throw enough debris into the
atmosphere to cause
the global winters many blame for mass extinctions.
Dust dumped over New Zealand by the central American impact said
to have
killed the dinosaurs amounted to "not much more than what
you would find in
your house if you didn't clean for a weekend or two.
"The [meteor] impact theory is largely driven by American
imagination," said
the professor, adding, however, that a meteor could have been
"the last
straw" for weakened ecosystems.
Professor Lister, who conceded his views were "highly
controversial",
expects tectonic plate foundering will continue to drive climatic
change and
extinctions.
"In 20 to 25 million years Java will hit Port Hedland. It
will make a
mountain range along the West Australian coast. You will have
good skiing."
Would humans survive the next foundering of tectonic plates?
"You would have
to say, based on the records, that we have had a good
innings."
Copyright 2003, Sydney Morning Herald
--------------------------------------------------------------------
CCNet is a scholarly electronic network. To
subscribe/unsubscribe, please
contact the moderator Benny J Peiser < b.j.peiser@livjm.ac.uk
>. Information
circulated on this network is for scholarly and educational use
only. The
attached information may not be copied or reproduced for
any other purposes without prior permission of the copyright
holders. The
fully indexed archive of the CCNet, from February 1997 on, can be
found at
http://abob.libs.uga.edu/bobk/cccmenu.html.
DISCLAIMER: The opinions,
beliefs and viewpoints expressed in the articles and texts and in
other
CCNet contributions do not necessarily reflect the opinions,
beliefs and
viewpoints of the moderator of this network.
--------------------------------------------------------------------